I'm basing my conclusion off what they told me. If they do teach love ed properly and these idiots are still getting knocked up with 3 kids why should anyone be giving them money?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2546606/Risky behavior is higher amongst lower-income people. Lower-income schools result in lower-income students, families. Risky behavior is engaged in, children are born in low-income neighborhood, grow up in low-income neighborhood, engage in risky behavior again.
It's called the poverty cycle. It can be broken if you do two things: a) fund schools enough b) fund schools correctly.
If one of those two doesn't happen, then you have low success rates. Both need to occur in order for it to work. You've been suggesting that we do only (b) because 'damaged system' with no proof, and you've been accusing everyone of wanting to do only (a). In reality, we want both (a) and (b) to happen at the same time.
With enough money to support the right educational programs and the right funding patterns, then low-income low-achievement schools can be changed to high achievement schools. If you have no money, you can't fund correctly.
