Thursday, March 10, 2011

Oakland To Lose Federal Funding For Poor?

Let's hope so.

One thing that more or less guarantees that you'll wind up with lots of poor people is when you construct programs that pay them to be poor.

Apparently both the Chronicle and Mayor Qunt are worried about these cuts reducing Oakland's ability to continue all its handouts to the folks who are unwilling or unable to work.

One program that appears to be of particular concern to Qunt is Head Start. I guess she's never read the research which demonstrates pretty conclusively that Head Start does nothing to improve children's later prospects. Same goes, by the way, for poor kids bussed to nicer parts of town.

The irony of all of this is that these folks are ignoring the real story this week, which is the census data indicating Oakland continues to gentrify rapidly in spite of the recession and housing crash.

Maybe instead of trying to keep its poor, Oakland should welcome this reduction in funding as an opportunity to try and attract people who actually add something to the local economy.


  1. Your offensive language helps to defeat whatever argument you are trying to make. You just alienate your readers and give the impression that you are mean and juvenile.

  2. Dear The Boss,

    Please provide references for your claim about Head Start, and any number of things you write about. And define "later prospects." And explain how funding job training programs - whether or not you agree with them or have issues with their effectiveness (which I'm positive you do) - qualifies as "paying people to be poor." Because your blog reads as if you've literally never had a conversation with any of the demographics that you write about.

  3. I can't take anyone serious who uses the word "qunt" as "clever" pejorative for the female mayor. As a city employee that works with financially disadvantaged youth in programs that rely on funding, I have to ask what have you done for your community you write about? It is easy to sit and blog from any view point than to get out there and do anything. And two, if you have seen the smiles on the kids faces?

  4. Allow me to step in: 1) Established follow-up on Head Start shows that any enhanced performance ceases as soon as the adult assistance is discontinued... irrespective of the length of time spent in the program. There is no LASTING benefit. 2) I've hired people from job training programs. Had to let them go shortly thereafter. They never learned to work. Excessive absense in addition to poor job skills that were never upgraded. 3) I think it was Mark Steyn who recently wrote that demographics is destiny." The decline in Oaktown's Black population is the result of middle class Black Folks bugging out of the 'hood for the suburbs. Guess who gets left behind? The lower class, more criminally inclined inner city denizens who subsist on rent control, overwhelmed law enforcement and taxpayer handouts.

  5. Dan,

    Don't you think it should be the responsibility of Head Start to prove it *does* accomplish something, seeing as it's receiving the funding?


    Fair enough. People really don't like that nickname!


    I've invested quite a lot of money in this community through housing and business connections. I don't believe the government is a valid form of "investment." So, I'm sorry but I can't really respect what you do.

  6. Allow me to jump in.
    Dan, here is the result page of search head start + failure:
    All gains evaporate by middle school.

  7. I don't see the "offensive" language Marleen is speaking of.

    This is good. I am amazed I didn't stumble on it sooner as there's not much non-leftist in these parts of California.

    I am a libertarian who organizes social mixers for limited/responsible government enthusiasts which attracts republicans, tea partiers and even some disaffected democrats. Check us out and keep up the good work.