6 ms·
This seems like a good idea but there are a couple of issues though: 1. I believe from anecdotal evidence most young children start serious preparation so that
by eshvk 14y ago
This seems like a good idea but there are a couple of issues though:
1. I believe from anecdotal evidence most young children start serious preparation so that by their teens, they would have to have a significant portion of their technique mastered so that talent can start playing a significant role. However, I am not sure how easy it is identify the kids pre-teenage.
2. Investment costs: Importing a group of people just for the sole purpose of racking up medals (non withstanding the inherent creepiness of it) will be tremendously expensive. How do you justify the expense if the children don't want to do it eventually?
- w1ntermute 14y ago> However, I am not sure how easy it is identify the kids pre-teenage. I'm not sure how the Chinese do it, but this is exactly their approach. Children with talent (or at least some signs of it) are taken at a very young age (~5 y/o) and intensively trained. > Importing a group of people just for the sole purpose of racking up medals (non withstanding the inherent creepiness of it) will be tremendously expensive. How do you justify the expense if the children don't want to do it eventually? Will it be expensive? I made this suggestion based on the assumption that, as with the IT industry, it's more cost efficient to bring in workers from abroad than to depend on domestic talent. In any case, from what I can tell, the main costs come from buying equipment and hiring coaches, not from the children. All you have to do is pay for their food, shelter, schooling, and other basic needs. The children of course will not be forced to remain in the program if they do not want to. Contrary to popular belief, this is the system used by China - no one is kidnapped or coerced into participating, although that no doubt happens in North Korea. In any case, the US policy would be that at any point, they can quit and go back home, if they so desire. Citizenship would be reserved for those who stick with the program until they are of Olympic age (of course, there would be weeding out as well, so the numbers would be relatively low). And even if they end up going back at the age of 10, they would have greatly benefited from just getting nutritious food during a crucial part of their childhood - child malnutrition rates in India are almost 50%, even higher than those in sub-Saharan Africa. Childhood malnutrition leads to lifelong physical and mental infirmity, so the children would no doubt benefit. There's no denying the creepiness to some people, although I don't see it that way (America is a nation of immigrants who came for a better life, and that would describe these kids perfectly). This would be a cost-efficient and humane way to reassert US Olympic dominance over China, something that a lot of people are concerned with.
- vacri 14y agoWill it be expensive? Sending a scouting network into a foreign country that largely doesn't speak your language in order to watch a broad swathe of children isn't going to be cheap. Given that the US already leads the board in total medal tally, do they really need to game the system that way? Besides, it makes an even further mockery of the idea of 'amateur athletes' when you're essentially buying them from the other side of the world. Citizenship would be reserved for those who stick with the program until they are of Olympic age (of course, there would be weeding out as well, so the numbers would be relatively low). Lure a family to an entirely different culture with promises of wealth and wellbeing, then if they aren't gloriously successful for whatever reason, throw them away like trash, back into a culture they're now not used to, particularly the kids? All so you can increment your medal tally to stem the 'yellow peril'? This is morally reprehensible.
- w1ntermute 14y ago> Sending a scouting network into a foreign country that largely doesn't speak your language in order to watch a broad swathe of children isn't going to be cheap. Translators come cheap in a country where English is relatively well spoken. > Given that the US already leads the board in total medal tally, do they really need to game the system that way? How long do you think that's going to last? China is going to beat us in both total medal count and the number of gold medals within 2 or 3 Olympics (if not this one), and then we'll have no hope at all. > Besides, it makes an even further mockery of the idea of 'amateur athletes' when you're essentially buying them from the other side of the world. Hey, fight fire with fire. What do you think the Chinese are doing? It's not like these children are going to be mistreated. And I don't think giving them proper food, shelter, education, and clothing can be equated with "buying" them. > Lure a family to an entirely different culture with promises of wealth and wellbeing, then if they aren't gloriously successful for whatever reason, throw them away like trash, back into a culture they're now not used to, particularly the kids? All so you can increment your medal tally to stem the 'yellow peril'? This is morally reprehensible. OK, so set up some training centers in India instead. If they make it to the age of 10 or so without being weeded out, bring them to America. Anyone who comes to America and stays for at least 6 months can be guaranteed citizenship, even if they don't win. How does that sound? These are just details. My post was intended to lay out a general plan, not to invite nitpicking over the details of every word. And the "yellow peril" you talk about (racial connotations notwithstanding) is a very real thing. China is going to dominate the world very soon. The best way we can fight back is to rely on America's basics, one of which is immigration.