11 ms·

It's an interesting list... To me, improving provision of medical service and education definitely seems possible, as a lot of current problems are due to the f

by xixi77 11y ago

It's an interesting list... To me, improving provision of medical service and education definitely seems possible, as a lot of current problems are due to the fairly artificial constraints in the system. Removing them, or going around them, can really do a lot. Things like child care and finance are not as obvious to me though: these are already competitive industries, with very price-sensitive clients too, and (IMO) mostly sensible regulations, so if something both cheap and competitive was possible, why hasn't it happened yet? Also, as for "Equally credible alternatives to university education": I'm not sure if I get this one right, wording is a little confusing -- you mean the problem being that people feel forced to spend lots of $$ to study things they won't actually need for their jobs? IMO, to answer that, we also first need to answer why exactly is it the case currently: e.g. no government sponsorship of community colleges is going to help if the reason is that education is primarily used as a signaling device... (Edit: I see your response to another question -- namely a startup offering an independent alternative to screening on education -- and I agree that this can be promising. Not easy, but promising.)

Retric 11y ago
Childcare is dying for some automation. 1 person can care for ~3 very young children(<15mo) which is freaking expensive. That grows to ~8-10 starting at ~4 years old. Worse, these are all minimum numbers. You need extra staff to cover someone being sick, or turn people away.
- tptacek 11y ago
  This is obvious, right? A K-12 teacher handles ~30 kids at a time, starting at age 5-6. Their job is more rigorous than the one a child-care professional does. Meanwhile, most parents are happier about the time their kids spend in school than they are about the time they spend in childcare.
- panglott 11y ago
  Why is child care something that should be automated? Doesn't it make sense to spend a lot of high-value human attention on small children? Humans are not a product. They are an end in themselves. It's like trying to automate your friends or your spouse.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    No, it doesn't make sense to spend lots of high-value human attention on small children. For a pretty huge part of the day, small children are better off exploring the world on their own, and making social connections on their own. What's needed is safety, comfort, and some degree of monitored structure. Again: once your kid turns 5 (4, if you're rich and you send your kid to private all-day preschool), you're generally sending them somewhere where one adult will watch as many as 30 kids concurrently, all the while educating them to the point where they can creditably pass standardized tests. That's a harder job than just making sure kids are happy and engaged, and yet we pay far less for it than we do for child care. Child care is a huge part of why people get crappier jobs than they might. You can't go back to school if you have no savings and need to pay at least $15/hr for child care; in fact, you can't even speculatively take a lower-paying job for career advancement if that job doesn't pay enough to offset child care.
    - jacobush 11y ago
      This is one of the scariest posts I have read. Infants and small children definitely need high-value human attention. I don't even know where to begin, just wanted to let the world know that I'm horrified by your comment.
      - Retric 11y ago
        High-value human attention, but not High-value human attention 24/7. Sure, if we want to subsidize stay at home parents for young children that's a reasonable choice. But, pushing daycare out of reach of most low income family's pushes people into poverty which also has significant long term negative impacts on those same children.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Are you horrified by all the parents who put their kids in day care while they work?
        aidenn0 11y ago
- CWuestefeld 11y ago
  The regulatory bar for childcare is absurdly high, and I can't imagine how much of it serves a constructive purpose (source: my sister, who is a teacher, once looked into opening a daycare center). But like the "war on terror", it's regulation we can't get rid of because nobody wants to be the guy who made kids less safe.

by xixi77 11y ago

Retric 11y ago

Childcare is dying for some automation. 1 person can care for ~3 very young children(<15mo) which is freaking expensive. That grows to ~8-10 starting at ~4 years old. Worse, these are all minimum numbers. You need extra staff to cover someone being sick, or turn people away.

tptacek 11y ago
This is obvious, right? A K-12 teacher handles ~30 kids at a time, starting at age 5-6. Their job is more rigorous than the one a child-care professional does. Meanwhile, most parents are happier about the time their kids spend in school than they are about the time they spend in childcare.
panglott 11y ago
Why is child care something that should be automated? Doesn't it make sense to spend a lot of high-value human attention on small children? Humans are not a product. They are an end in themselves. It's like trying to automate your friends or your spouse.
- tptacek 11y ago
  No, it doesn't make sense to spend lots of high-value human attention on small children. For a pretty huge part of the day, small children are better off exploring the world on their own, and making social connections on their own. What's needed is safety, comfort, and some degree of monitored structure. Again: once your kid turns 5 (4, if you're rich and you send your kid to private all-day preschool), you're generally sending them somewhere where one adult will watch as many as 30 kids concurrently, all the while educating them to the point where they can creditably pass standardized tests. That's a harder job than just making sure kids are happy and engaged, and yet we pay far less for it than we do for child care. Child care is a huge part of why people get crappier jobs than they might. You can't go back to school if you have no savings and need to pay at least $15/hr for child care; in fact, you can't even speculatively take a lower-paying job for career advancement if that job doesn't pay enough to offset child care.
  - jacobush 11y ago
    This is one of the scariest posts I have read. Infants and small children definitely need high-value human attention. I don't even know where to begin, just wanted to let the world know that I'm horrified by your comment.
    - Retric 11y ago
      High-value human attention, but not High-value human attention 24/7. Sure, if we want to subsidize stay at home parents for young children that's a reasonable choice. But, pushing daycare out of reach of most low income family's pushes people into poverty which also has significant long term negative impacts on those same children.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Are you horrified by all the parents who put their kids in day care while they work?
      - aidenn0 11y ago
CWuestefeld 11y ago
The regulatory bar for childcare is absurdly high, and I can't imagine how much of it serves a constructive purpose (source: my sister, who is a teacher, once looked into opening a daycare center). But like the "war on terror", it's regulation we can't get rid of because nobody wants to be the guy who made kids less safe.