As long as you are paying for it, yes. You want to spend $100K on music lessons for your child who has a bad attitude and no musical appreciation or talent, have at it. When you advocate spending more of others money, shouldn't that be a valid question? I can spend my paycheck on Twinkie and Ho His all day long. When I ask your company to buy something, I should be able to state a business purpose and what returns we can expect.

Refer to what I wrote.

Refer to what I wrote. Specifically about spending OPM or Other People's Money vs spending personal funds. If you cannot or will not understand the point, I am not sure how to proceed.

Get used to it: there will be inefficiencies in education as with all other things. IOW, some funds spent on education will not bear fruit. Let's all just commit suicide then.

So, you really think that people set out to become teen parents and work at McFood as a life ambition? Seems a little myopic to me.

I wonder if some of these kids had a cultural immersion opportunity discussed here, if they might not find an interest in culture or education...and maybe not end up a teen parent working at McFood? Can you wrap your head around that?

So your idea is to spend money like it is going out of style? I'm simply saying that before aiming for some idealistic goal, let's be sure that it has a good chance, not 100% but not %1 of a chance it bears fruit

And I could get hit by a bus tomorrow and everything was for naught. The only guarantee in life is there are no guarantees.

If you're speaking of adults, no argument. But as bot stated, and I know personally and professionally to be true; children can learn two or three languages at once without confusion. It can be the tower of Babel for a while, but eventually they sort it out without issue. My son babbled along using whatever vocabulary he felt most comfortable with till about age three, when he began to distinguish, responding when spoken to in the same language, and choosing which language to use depending on who he was talking to. The girls did the same thing with English and spanish.
From birth to roughly pre-adolescence, actual hardwiring is taking place in the brain. Neural pathways are created in response to spoken language. Once those pathways are created, they don't go anywhere. Memorization takes a backseat in this learning scenario. They're still there in Bot's old noggin. If he takes a spanish immersion trip he'll be amazed at how fast the language comes back to him.
The growth process stops at about age 12, and anyone older than that who learns another language must rely solely on memorization. I see this all the time in school. Give me a kindergartner straight from southern Mexico who doesn't know a word of English, and she'll be able to use simple expressions to express her needs by Thanksgiving, and writing sentences by spring. The same kid entering school here at the age of 13 will find it infinitely more difficult to pick up English.

To the ramparts!! Educators are wasting Aklim's money!!!!

Kinda like the saying "If you fail to plan, you planned to fail". So maybe they didn't start out wanting to be in that position. Maybe they wanted to be an astronaut, billionaire, General of the Army, world class doctor that cured cancer, etc, etc. But alas, ambition should be made of sterner stuff as opposed to "I want....".

Or maybe if they had seen others starve they might get the hint that they don't want to be that? I didn't do drugs because I grew up in a place that executed drug dealers. You see Joe Schmoe get arrested today and in a short while later, he gets a necktie party invite as the guest of honor. Hmmmm. Maybe I don't want to deal drugs to make a living. Again, not going to be 100% but it should trap much of the clowns and those that it doesn't, well, they get to be an example of what not to be.

No. Not really.

Agreed. So why even lift a finger? I mean, you could be dead tomorrow so why not party and live it up today? If you don't die tomorrow, maybe it will be the next? After all, just because I studied hard and worked hard doesn't mean I will get a job and be able to feed myself. Might as well not work or study or learn a trade. Same argument.

While there are no guarantees, there is "stacking the deck in your favor.

The operative word is "can". Just because I can sleep with my sister doesn't mean I will. If they show a willingness to learn, they can make it happen. If they show poor attitude, they cannot make it happen. It is that simple. Just because you can give me all your money tomorrow doesn't mean you will

What would you call increased spending with little chance of return? Besides a waste, that is.

I am not saying we should not invest. Far from it. However, by me investing, I should REASONABLY expect to see an increase. One spark here or one there isn't really an increase. Like you buy an expensive tool for a job. Do you buy it without knowing if you will make the money back WITHIN REASON? If you expect it to allow you to do jobs say once a week and within 2 years, you make the money back and it is pure profit from then on, you'd go into debt. OTOH, if you don't see yourself doing more than one more job in 20 years and you'd pay it off in 300 years at the rate you are going, you'd pass.

yes Im speaking of only adults, for children this argument is invalid, children can learn multiple languages quite easily. e.g. my 2 yr old daughter can understand similar questions in two separate languages which are oceans apart.

The part of remembering your mother tongue is very true, in the early part of my life I was alienated from my mother tongue at the age of 4, and I had to relearn kindergarten stuff of my mother tongue at the age of 12. I could speak it rudimentarily but could not write or read it at all. In about 2 months I was at the proper 12 yr old level (as my report cards said). It almost was as if it was a lost memory.

Yup, probably. I'd argue that nurture plays a greater role than nature in societal success.

My reasoning is thus: Given children of equal intelligence, I'll bet the kid of wealthy parents performs better, on average, than poor children.

I'll bet twin studies will show that a kid raised by poor parents underperforms a twin adopted by rich parents.

OTOH, no matter the material well-being of the child, parents who push their children to high performance will outperform children whose parents don't GAS. Take Clarence Thomas, for example. Or Colin Powell. Children of asian immigrant parents are another fine example.

My kid in Fr immersion isn't a genius, she's high-performing, somewhat above average intelligence. She is highly self-motivated. Mrs B and I worked very hard to afford every opportunity for our kids and begged, cajoled and forced them to study and work up to their potential. They all had jobs growing up -- no unearned allowances. You don't get anything just for breathing. Parents who don't invest love and attention to their kids, who don't push them, and fail to reward self-discipline will have kids (in general) who underperform and are self-indulgent.