As people that know me know, I coach and train kids to play competitive chess. One thing that pains me is that many kids parents cannot afford chess lessons. I try with all my might to make it affordable by running groups, where the cost is shared by more than one student. It is not perfect, but this solution is better than nothing.
When I tutor kids we meet at StarBucks, or to a Panera Bread, Corner Bakery, or to a Barnes and Noble, etc (unless running groups, I try to stay out of the home because there are many distractions there.) At these places, I see kids being tutored in Mathematics, ACTs, Chemistry etc. In the meantime, parents of kids that need the help but that cannot afford these tutors, their kids fall further behind in their intellectual development. Naturally, the mentors flock to the rich areas where we can get payed for the intense demand of our services. If I have a choice to train a kid for $40/Hr or $120/Hr, I am forced by economics to tutor the kid whose parents want to compete for me harder through money. Well, guess what?
Wrong answer.
Stop them from what? You can't stop a child from playing chess anymore than you can stop a child from playing football. What I am talking about is access to help, training, things that can take your natural talent and put it on an exponential learning curve.lack of chess tutoring is not going to stop a kid who wants it badly enough.
See above. You don't understand the issue. A chess set costs $15, well within the means of even the poorest of the poor. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE. Maximizing your talent is. Any kid that I train will pulvirize even the most talented kid without training. Extrapolate this to opportunities in general.the rich kids are just getting more rounded.
the kids who will be great chess players will find a way to get it done with or without tutoring. Great players will make sure they learn.
In fact, the situation is dire at most schools, at least in Chicago. For example:in most public school systems there are plenty of opportunities for poor kids.
the issue is not the opportunity... the issue is family.
Yeah I have heard this argument too, David Brooks being its biggest champion:to many kids grow up in an almost fatherless community. Govt programs have been destroying families and communities since the 60s.
Disagree, Comrade.
Most of the 3.5 Billion are here because their parents didn't practice birth control an are unable to financially support their spawn.
High inheritance taxes are nothing but the theft of personal property.
You'll be on my ignore list as soon as the function is restored.
I am not trying to be offensive, but you don't know what you are saying.
Stop them from what? You can't stop a child from playing chess anymore than you can stop a child from playing football. What I am talking about is access to help, training, things that can take your natural talent and put it on an exponential learning curve.
See above. You don't understand the issue. A chess set costs $15, well within the means of even the poorest of the poor. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE. Maximizing your talent is. Any kid that I train will pulvirize even the most talented kid without training. Extrapolate this to opportunities in general.
In fact, the situation is dire at most schools, at least in Chicago. For example:
http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicag...th-loop-tif-rahm-emanuel/Content?oid=10855117
Instead of Chess:
http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicag...es-school-chess-programs/Content?oid=10923815
Yeah I have heard this argument too, David Brooks being its biggest champion:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/17/opinion/brooks-the-inequality-problem.html?ref=davidbrooks&_r=0
I am not disagreeing with this hypotheses (more like fact) but it is nowhere near the whole story.
ACCESS TO MONEY EQUALIZES OPPORTUNITY