*A child born to an educated mother is more than 2x as likely to survive to the age of 5

*Educated mothers are 50% more likely to immunize their children than mothers without an education

*Every extra year of school increases productivity by 10 - 30%

*Individual earnings increase by 10% for each year of school completed

*A girl who completes basic education is 3x less likely to contract HIV/AIDS

*Educated women re-invest 90% of their income in their families. Men invest 30 - 40%

Ms. Diane, do u have any references for these facts? I'd like to see the research as some of the statements seem to make sence intuatively. But a few of them are a bit strange to me... thx...

I actually Googled the whole phrase, and got lots of hits.

Education for life

Good information!

Bottom Line is: Keep them in school as long as possible to improve their chances of becoming productive and self sustaining adults. ignorance seems to breed poverty.

I might take issue with the last statement. I remember decades of investing 100% in my family.

Good point Bobber, my husband has done/ is doing the 100% thing. Might be that this refers to certain countries.

"The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Countries also points to the relationship between women in the workforce and higher GDP, noting that growth in India, for example, would increase by 1.08 ppt if its female labor-participation rate were put on par with the US. In the book, Women Empowered: Inspiring Change in the Emerging World (2007), former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright cites the economic benefits of investing in women, pointing out that women reinvest 90% of their income in their families and communities, compared to men who reinvest only 30% to 40% of their income. Entrepreneur Vikram Akula, who founded SKS Microfinance in 1998 to spur development in rural India, has provided about US$275 million in loans and life insurance to more than 900,000 women living in India’s slums and villages while enjoying a 99% repayment rate. Akula attributes the high repayment rate to the fact that women are more likely than men to support each other (e.g., in repaying the loan) and to invest in their households."

I googled too and found people saying this info came from UNICEF. But I still haven't found any specific study or reseach to back this up. The points I have a hard time believing are:

*Individual earnings increase by 10% for each year of school completed

*Educated women re-invest 90% of their income in their families. Men invest 30 - 40%

You're it Bobber.

Who usally pays for home mortgages, car payments, utility bills, childrens tuition? things like that yukno? That is the reason I'd like to see some unbiased facts when ascertaions such as those posted are made. Guess i should just drink the tea and baa baa follow the sheep's dog.

I don't know, but as I look around in Belize, it seems a lot of the children are being raised by grandmothers while their mothers work to support them and the dad has moved on making more babies with another young lady.

Bobber, I would say that I spent 25 years of my life contributing 98% of my income to the family. I will admit to consuming an occasional adult beverage during that time, mostly for mental therapy to keep me from doing harm one or another of my kids.

[quote=crockhunter]I don't know, but as I look around in Belize, it seems a lot of the children are being raised by grandmothers while their mothers work to support them and the dad has moved on making more babies with another young lady.

quote]

True nuff. But I have also seen societies where typically the men work for wages while the woman performs the household and child-raising work. So how/when and where are such “statistics” made? And I think that poverty and lack of education are very real and important problems, and generalizations made w/o any supporting evidence does not help raise awareness or show how any meaningful help could be offered.

"Who usally pays for home mortgages, car payments, utility bills, childrens tuition?"

You actually think that people living in poverty have a house, a car and children in college?

Thank you Simon for helping point out part of the problem with such generalizations purported to seem as facts... What was mentioned in the so-called "facts" was that:

*Educated women re-invest 90% of their income in their families. Men invest 30 - 40%.

This doesn't specify if they are in poverty, if the men they say are educated or not. What do they consider as a reinvestment in the family? Without any substantiating info, it just sounds like a bunch of hyperbole

Also, I might add that in the US, there should be an economic distinction made between poor and impoverished. The "poverty level" is (in my opinion) defined and yet somewhat vague. Kind of like grading on a curve, comparing it to the US standard of living. Irrelevant anywhere else in the world. My opinion. Needless to say, education is a key that may unlock a better standard of living for those who put in the time and have the drive. Education is a tool, nothing more. How skillfully you can wield that tool will determine the outcome.

A reading of this thread offered me a small insight into why nothing ever gets fixed in Congress!

While there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that education, or lack thereof, is the problem, within moments the debate has degenerated into….

“It’s your fault…no, it’s your fault!”

Here’s a wild and crazy idea…how about some thoughts on how to FIX the problem?

Then we can move onto the debt crisis, job creation, political corruption and special interests?

Yes..of course I meant in Belize..it’s not like this is US Chat

Education does not indicate any exceptional intelligence. While the two are definitely not mutually exclusive, neither one is tied at the hip with the other. Just an observation (or what my family calls a bobservation).

Hey Pug.. the reason our form of government would be so hard to overthrow is that you would have to get a bunch of people to AGREE to do it.

There isn't a cure all. Feeding and educating the third world will go a long way, but even that only goes so far if there are not opertunities.

There isn't a cure all. Feeding and educating the third world will go a long way, but even that only goes so far if there are not opertunities.

Here is a reprint of an article from 2006..

Milwaukee’s Parental Choice Program, enacted with bipartisan support in 1990, provides private school vouchers to students from families at or below 175% of the poverty line. Its constitutionality has been supported by rulings from both the Wisconsin and U.S. Supreme Courts.
Yet [Wisconsin Governor Jim] Doyle, a union-financed Democrat, has vetoed three attempts to loosen the state law that limits enrollment in the program to 15% of Milwaukee’s public school enrollment. This cap, put in place in 1995 as part of a compromise with anti-choice lawmakers backed by the unions, wasn’t an issue when only a handful of schools were participating. But the program has grown steadily to include 127 schools and more than 14,000 students today. Wisconsin officials expect the voucher program to exceed the 15% threshold next year, which means Mr. Doyle’s schoolhouse-door act is about to have real consequences.
“Had the cap been in effect this year,” says Susan Mitchell of School Choice Wisconsin, “as many as 4,000 students already in the program would have lost seats. No new students could come in, and there would be dozens of schools that have been built because of school choice in Milwaukee that would close. They’re in poor neighborhoods and would never have enough support from tuition-paying parents or donors to keep going.”
A 2004 study of high school graduation rates by Jay Greene of the Manhattan Institute found that students using vouchers to attend Milwaukee’s private schools had a graduation rate of 64%, versus 36% for their public school counterparts. Harvard’s Caroline Hoxby has shown that Milwaukee public schools have raised their standards in the wake of voucher competition.(emphasis added)

The unions scored a separate “victory” in Florida three weeks ago when the state supreme court there struck down the Opportunity Scholarship Program. Passed in 1999, the program currently enrolls 700 children from chronically failing state schools, letting them transfer to another public school or use state money to attend a private school. Barring some legislative damage control, the 5-2 ruling means these kids face the horrible prospect of returning to the state’s education hellholes next year.
The decision is a textbook case of results-oriented jurisprudence. The majority claimed the program violates a provision of Florida’s constitution that requires the state to provide for “a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools.” Because “private schools that are not ‘uniform’ when compared with each other or the public system” could receive state funds under the program, the majority deemed it unconstitutional.
What the Milwaukee and Florida examples show is that unions and their allies are unwilling to let even successful voucher experiments continue to exist. If they lose one court case, they will sue again–and then again, as long as it takes. And they’ll shop their campaign cash around for years until they find a politician like Jim Doyle willing to sell out Wisconsin’s poorest kids in return for their endorsement. Is there a more destructive force in American public life?

Anyone remember what going on in Wisconsin at the moment...Oh yeah...Union backed recall election, even though the budget is balanced and property taxes have gone down.

This information came to me via an official at USAID who is presently working in Mali.

Pug along those lines the battle goes on. Imagine the thought of using performance as a measure.

Yawn

Gee Mr. Clover, I thought you where all for the ballot box and democracy??? Not when a union is threatened though and may have to live up to standards that most other professions already adhere?? When is democracy OK then?

This thread wasn't about petty partisan US politics....but somehow you and Pug managed to destroy the message. Oh well...you don't have to be a jet scientist....or how does that go? You just need to comprehend a story line that bears no relevance to your post....just sayin'

Trying to post this a 3rd time..apparently while the site was down my comment(s) were lost.

"This doesn't specify if they are in poverty, if the men they say are educated or not."

Read the subject line. It will help you define what is being talked about and the generalization is that it's about people living in poverty.

Take off the blinders a bit and think in terms of third world poverty where education can create opportunity.

The message of this thread is that education will help people of all races rise out of poverty.

My contention is that its the quality of education, not just the length of time spent in school that matters and that a failing 12th grader will benefit little from 2 additional years of state provided "education".

Whenever there is competition, in ANY field, not just education, the consumer (student) benefits, and yet voucher programs are fought at every opportunity by the Teachers Unions, who will ALWAYS put their members and their political philosophy ahead of the needs of the students.

As I highlighted of all races, please default to standard insult reply #2

I believe the original post talks about remedial education in the 3rd world. For instance: the use of condoms will probably reduces the incidence of AIDS. The ability to use a computerized cash register will probably improve your chances of finding a job. The ability to do simple geometry could create a job as a journeyman construction super or aid in placing someone on a survey crew. The original post has nothing to do with unions or anything remotely similar to the issues you seem so obsessed with in the developed nations.