• huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I mean generally the solution proposed by progressive countries is: use taxes on the wealthy to fund programs for the poor.

    Universal Pre-K is a popular idea and works by just expanding school systems out to younger ages.

    Your complaint here seems to be that existing Pre-K went from babysitting to requiring minimal professional qualifications because it received government backing. I’m confused as to where that caused unqualified babysitters to no longer be able to work? A government funded Pre-K does not preclude a paid independent Pre-K any more than normal schools preclude private schools.

    What it sounds like is that you’re complaining that regulations pushed out unqualified and unvetted people who were previously receiving a publicly paid salary to spend all day in a sand pit. You also seem to claim that this represented an appreciable population of Pre-K workers, so much so that it disrupted the entire pay schedule.

    I’m not an expert on the exact situation of 20 years ago that you’re claiming and it’s possible that you’re entirely on the money but it doesn’t smell right. It smells like hard economic times and inflation causing prices to go up or more laws with no funding or support. Because if it was just a public sector getting more government funding you’d see an increase in teachers, even if there was an increase in requirements.

    If a government was making a push for universal Pre-K and not funding that push then it wasn’t progressive. At best it was liberal.