[lex24]

If he would have been told that his death would help underprivileged kids in school (Dad had been tutoring such kids in English for years) he would have been thrilled. And if they said they’d have  to advance it a couple months or so, he would have gladly taken that trade off.

Wow, what a leap. Your father's accelerated death wouldn't help underprivileged kids. The current offering is to let a bunch of people die so that parents can have state subsidized childcare so that businesses can have workers. Those people dying wouldn't help kids in any way. The people dying would be the outcome of the premature and without proper preparation reopening of schools, not the contributor to helping underprivileged kids access education. 

Also, most underprivileged kids are not even being helped in most school settings. Schools actually harm them. 

Additionally, these kids have family members. And while your dad needlessly dying sooner wouldn't help any of these kids, one of their parents dying would be devastating.

Finally, we don't need a tradeoff of free childcare ... I mean school ... or old people dying. We could actually come together as a society and fight the spread of the disease so that far fewer people died and come up with better ways of educating children since the conventional schooling model was already a failure, particularly for the kids you're speaking of, before the pandemic.

Of course we can.  I’m not suggesting otherwise.  I was responding to a specific post that implied that octogenarians wouldn’t be willing to sacrifice for kids.  Perhaps I misread the post. As for school, suffice to say we disagree.I also disagree with your framing of “the current offering”. Districts are searching for ways to open schools as safely as possible under the circumstances of this pandemic.   I don’t think many (certainly none that I’m aware of in California) are talking about simply opening up school as usual with 30 kids in the classroom five days a week.

[lex24]

If he would have been told that his death would help underprivileged kids in school (Dad had been tutoring such kids in English for years) he would have been thrilled. And if they said they’d have  to advance it a couple months or so, he would have gladly taken that trade off.

Wow, what a leap. Your father's accelerated death wouldn't help underprivileged kids. The current offering is to let a bunch of people die so that parents can have state subsidized childcare so that businesses can have workers. Those people dying wouldn't help kids in any way. The people dying would be the outcome of the premature and without proper preparation reopening of schools, not the contributor to helping underprivileged kids access education. 

Also, most underprivileged kids are not even being helped in most school settings. Schools actually harm them. 

Additionally, these kids have family members. And while your dad needlessly dying sooner wouldn't help any of these kids, one of their parents dying would be devastating.

Finally, we don't need a tradeoff of free childcare ... I mean school ... or old people dying. We could actually come together as a society and fight the spread of the disease so that far fewer people died and come up with better ways of educating children since the conventional schooling model was already a failure, particularly for the kids you're speaking of, before the pandemic.

Of course we can.  I’m not suggesting otherwise.  I was responding to a specific post that implied that octogenarians wouldn’t be willing to sacrifice for kids.  Perhaps I misread the post. As for school, suffice to say we disagree.I also disagree with your framing of “the current offering”. Districts are searching for ways to open schools as safely as possible under the circumstances of this pandemic.   I don’t think many (certainly none that I’m aware of in California) are talking about simply opening up school as usual with 30 kids in the classroom five days a week.