[tcostell]

The point of the study was to indicate how great it would be if we all had government provided services and would then be free from want. It underlines that ridiculous point by stressing the ways that its "for the children". It measures something as a benefit which I hold to be offensive in principle. The last thing I want is the government to be too involved in the raising of my child, in fact I do all I can to prevent it wherever possible.

It also ignores the fact that it's the propensity of government stepping in to handle the basic necessities of life that has contributed to the dismantling of broader society and the family. There is no need for a father if the state is willing to fill that role, but when the state does take on that role there are consequences which the study doesn't mention.

It's just more short sighted liberalism, explaining to all us idiots how we'd be better off if we just shut up and let them make all our decisions.

[Rummenigge]

It wasn't about giving a solution.

they asked questions like : " To what degree do children have access to a desk to do homework on - do they have all the literature they need to learn - are they healthy - do they get the time to work focused on homeworks, wich part of the income do parents spend for their upbringing etc.

it was'nt about "are they taken away from parents long enough to be indoctrinated"