“The prime minister asked Labour MP Graham Allen to look at the benefits of intervening to improve the life chances of children from poorer backgrounds. … His argument is that there would be a “deadweight to the economy” of having to meet the costs of underachievement and poor educational attainment in the future. This could be avoided by improving children’s development in the very early years of life. He said such early intervention should be seen as the best deficit reduction programme available to governments.”
So reports the BBC –
Has it come to this? The reason to improve a child’s life is to avoid a financial deficit in the country later? Really? Has love really been reduced to self-serving charity? There is a deadweight involved, to be sure. Jesus said it is better to have a millstone tied around the neck and be cast into the lake, than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. If hearts grow cold to children, except to lessen the financial burden… Woe, or Whoa. We choose.