Should have said " isn't the person who comes into the home OR takes the kids into her home or pre-school (normal day-care system as you have in mind) . ."

Somebody has to raise the next generation. How does substituting a baby sitter for a mom ". .provide a valuable economic boost to the economy"? Couldn't the person who comes into the home to tend the kids just go be the clerk at Kroger or Walmart rather than the mom being the clerk, resulting in exactly the same "boost to the economy"?

You're scenario only makes sense if you presume the mom in the example is a highly-skilled, highly productive person (computer engineer, physician, etc.) and the substitute mom is totally unskilled.

"My all-time favourite Madonna song ..."

Love Madonna too. You were playing all the ones I like!

"Let me get things started with a Whitney Houston favourite..."

I love Whitney Houston and ABBA

And selling it as "education" is pure sophistry. What it actually is is glorified day-care. Those who disagree need to review the government's own report on its audit of the "Head Start" program issued a few yrs ago. The report indicated "No effect beyond third".."

So what if it is only glorified daycare?? It still provides a valuable economic boost to the economy by allowing working women to participate in the labor force who would not be able to otherwise do so without the support of childcare.

That's a wrap for me ... but keep the party going all you fun-loving left coasters, you!

Take care everyone and stay safe.

PRiSM - Night To Remember

American Music

... it's the Rhythm of the Night!

Never Gonna Give You Up

Together Forever

Here's a sexy slow dance song off this album ...

I Want You

He's simply ... awesome.

Caribbean Queen

La Isla Bonita

you can dance!

there ya go.

Into The Groove

Too Much Monkey Business

I hope she's alright.

Malinda

Dancing Queen

I Wanna Dance With Somebody

Welcome to the CW Sunday Night Music Festival and Dance Party, where we dispense with all of the political chatter in favour of letting the music speak loud and proud ...

What are your favourite dance tunes - you know, the ones that make you move even when you don't really want to!?

In know, y'all are saving it up for the big shindig tonight.

Don't be shy, bring all your favourite tunes!

Here's a good article about how open discussion in PRIVATE can result in progress.
'Shortly after that tussle, Manchin and Sanders met privately, posed for a photo together and publicly reconciled. They’ve met four times so far this week, each softening their rhetoric toward one another and speaking more hopefully of a deal even as they continue to spar behind the scenes. Yet the cathartic blowup helped spark a significant breakthrough after a dayslong feud between the two that began when Sanders leaned publicly on Manchin to support Biden’s agenda.'
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/21/bulls-how-a-manchin-bernie-blowup-helped-unstick-dems-agenda-516561

It is astonishing that the same crowd who was outraged at the various Bengazi!!! hearings in the House of Representatives and the Trump administration's (at least partially-successful) subversion of the DOJ for political gain decries the lack of results from the January 6 commission. It is another example of the American attribute of immediate gratification.

Cad [8]

Often those things wind up coming from the pockets of those who benefit, not always from "those who can more than afford it" Witness Social Security.

Yeah, I understand the convention of referring to 'no-fee-for-service" things as being "free", but the "free" in "free markets" is another form of the word. Doesn't even mean "at no cost", means 'uncontrolled' or 'unconstrained'.

Free Pre-K means free to most Americans, not free of cost. Unless you're a flat taxer (great...raise taxes on 90% of us just to give the richest 10% yet another tax cut? Really?

"Free" will be to most of us and is going to come out of the pockets of those who can more than afford it.

Sure, but the word free applied to public services that do not charge fee-for-service is a convention that everyone understands. Public schools are "free", as are the public roads.
It's a tough argument to say that voters believe that they are not paying for the schools or roads through their taxes.

To say that "nothing the government does is ever free" because everything must be paid for is just rhetoric. By the same logic, we should forbid all inspiring conservative talk of "free enterprise" and "democratic freedoms", etc. Nothing, technically, is free, i.e. not paid for by a compensating cost.

Probably it's better to argue whether a free Pre-K education program is worth it, as you do further on, than to harp on meaningless wordplay.

To date, yes. But just because Garland isn't moving fast enough for many people's taste there's no reason whatsoever to not have confidence that "he'll get there." Quite frankly it's better for the Dems if this stuff is breaking in the months leading up to the Midterms, no?

And does anyone really think he's somehow going to go easy on the Repugs?

Typical Dem/Lib Economics ignorance. Nothing the gov't does is ever "free". It's ever only a question of 'Who pays when and how?

And selling it as "education" is pure sophistry. What it actually is is glorified day-care. Those who disagree need to review the government's own report on its audit of the "Head Start" program issued a few yrs ago. The report indicated "No effect beyond third".."