CB>TC>While I understand the line of thought IMO IF, and that is a big IF, we
  >TC>would stop allowing the system to be misused by the not so needy.  The
  >TC>truly hungry could have more funds for food and real basic needs could
  >TC>be met.  We simply make cheating and receiving handout the expected 
orm
  >TC>and the public school systems perpetuate the process to great excess.
CB>We're going 'round and 'round on this.  I don't argue the concept of the
  >need to stop cheaters, but, 1) is it worth allowing school districts the
  >right to invade the individual's privacy by requesting copies of federal
  >income tax forms, and 2) is it worth the additional expense to hire
  >people to review these forms and thus increase the size of the
  >bureaucracy?
Actually I was thinking more in the terms of the school districts just
forwarding the SSN of all the students who receive a free lunch to the
IRS.  The IRS who already has the income information then becomes the
enforcement arm.  Simple system, if an individual want to get services
for free they have already given up some of their freedom.  If they want
to tap our money they have to play by our rules.
CB>Your assessment of Head Start, then, is not that it is ineffective in
  >helping underprivileged children, but that the effects of the program,
  >aimed at 3- and 4-year-old children, wears off by third or fourth grade?
  > Then what we have heard and read is in agreement.  So, the question
  >remains, is the glass half-full or half-empty?  Since children in Head
  >Start programs show significant improvements in school only through 3rd
  >or 4th grade, does that mean we should eliminate the program so that
  >they don't get any of the advantage, or should we perhaps consider a
  >follow-up program, call it "keeping-up," for third graders?
Why not improve the overall system so no child receives preferential
treatment and hold the parents and children responsible for their
education ?  All head start seems to be doing is being a sudo parent
instead of requiring the parents to get their act together.
CB>If you had a cancer and knew that the treatment for it would
  >significantly improve the quality of your life for only the next 3 or 4
  >years, would you pay to have the treatment?  Or would you elect *not* to
  >pay for it because you knew that after 3 or 4 years the treatment would
  >stop having an effect?  And how does the notion that a new cure might be
  >available after the 3rd or 4th year impact your decision?
I don't see the parallel but I personally would opt not to have the
treatment. I would rather the funds wasted on my last four years of life
be used for my children's improved quality of life.  The notion of
possible new cures is almost humorous for personal reasons I will not
share for now.  I had the mis fortune of watching my father cling to
life for ten years passed what should have been his death date.  Extreme
waste of Federal money as he really did not have a clue about anything
around him.  I have a living will which hopefully will prevent such an
event with me.
CB>It is trite to talk about the success families have had because of the
  >opportunity to get a good education, but it has never been more strongly
  >evident than in my family.  One grandfather of mine was a janitor all of
  >his life, and my other grandfather escaped from the farm only to jump
  >from one low-paying job to another all of his life.  Without social
  >security and Medicaid, both of them would have lived very miserable
  >lives in old age.  These "welfare programs" were a God-send.  My father
  >was the first of his family to attend college, all thanks to that famous
  >welfare program known as the GI Bill...without which he could never have
  >afforded college.  My dad became a teacher, later a principal and later
  >still, a superintendent of schools.
The GI Bill I would class as WORK FARE.:) That is exactly how I broke
out of the poverty cycle.  Being a white male other freebies were simply
not available to me.  Only after surviving a year at the University of
Southeast Asia and two additional years of service did I receive the GI
Bill work fare program.  I can support that kind of WORK FARE program in
entirety.  It is the hand outs for dead beats that I have a problem
with.
CB>An uncle of mine, one of my mother's brothers, got a 4-year engineering
  >degree from Purdue as an enlistee in the US Navy, another "welfare
  >program."  Later still they sent him to communications school in
  >California for his Master's degree - again at government expense.  He
  >later became a Captain in the Navy and served for several years as chief
  >officer for all of NATO communications.  When he retired from the Navy
  >at age 38, he took a job as Vice-President of a think tank In D.C.,
  >hired because of his Washington connections.  Today my uncle brags that
  >he has reached his goal of becoming a millionaire - and, although he
  >does not credit the government for his success, the Navy and its
  >"welfare programs" took an 18-year-old kid who could not have afforded
  >college and made him successful beyond his family's wildest dreams.
Great success stories of individuals willing to do something to improve
their lives.  The only problem I have with the military is the
retirement program.  It should be like everyone else.  You start
collecting when your 55 or 65 depending on length of service.
___
 X QMPro 1.53 X All rising to a great place is by a winding stair.
--- Maximus 2.02
---------------