> I'd say the more important part is a baseline of stability.
Hear, hear. I'm pretty sure I've seen studies that show the initial situation most likely to yield later success is the upper-middle class. Rich enough to have some resources and the stability you mention, but not so rich that "the pressure's off" and one is tempted to just rest on parents' laurels.
I think stability is also part of the argument for UBI (or similar). The burdens and instability associated with poverty are drags on the whole economy. Free people from those, and they're better able to contribute back to the economy as both producers and consumers. Unfortunately, too many people would rather limit their own prosperity as long as they can limit someone else's even more, either because they don't understand how the system works or due to a nasty quirk of human nature.
I'd be happy to just get rid of the FASA system which assumes family stability.
A good friend of mine has to estrange herself from her family since they were extremely abusive. If someone is mistreating you,the only real option is to leave.
But in America you basically can't get college aid if you don't talk to your parents until your 24.
We should give everyone aid for college regardless of income. Hell, this would even help intact middle class families.
Just because your household income is 200k doesn't mean you have a spare 30k per child to attend college. These middle class households are taxed to pay for everyone's else's education anyway.
I fell into exactly one of those traps because financial aid was predicated on a parental contribution that was not really possible (because my mother had to spend that money on her own uncovered medical expenses). I know many others who have also been denied the aid they needed, and no few who received aid they didn't need. Basically every system in the US - not just education and health care but also housing, transportation, 90% of the legal system, etc. - is set up to create an interlocking set of burdens and traps for those who don't already have the means to rise above them.
Hear, hear. I'm pretty sure I've seen studies that show the initial situation most likely to yield later success is the upper-middle class. Rich enough to have some resources and the stability you mention, but not so rich that "the pressure's off" and one is tempted to just rest on parents' laurels.
I think stability is also part of the argument for UBI (or similar). The burdens and instability associated with poverty are drags on the whole economy. Free people from those, and they're better able to contribute back to the economy as both producers and consumers. Unfortunately, too many people would rather limit their own prosperity as long as they can limit someone else's even more, either because they don't understand how the system works or due to a nasty quirk of human nature.