If the kids had more money, they’d be more free.

That’s the American way.

wild leap from one large, difficult subject to a second one, with no provided evidence, real link or even train of thought.. just "mind salad".. counterproductive to the flow of the reason here

[delayed]

Can you expound upon this?

What's the alternative way, and why are kids free-er in it?

How do kids vary in wealth and how does this affect their freedom? (For current kids? For American kids at different times?)

Obviously they exchange labour for capital and are rewarded commensurately by the free market.

Thinking about the freedoms of the chimney sweeping children in the free markets of historical England almost brought a tear to my eyes, thank you.

They were perfectly free to go work in a textile mill or coal mine if they didn't like being a chimney sweep!

This is entirely true; rich people generally send their children to schools where they're treated with more dignity.

The American way is to save the elderly at the expense of the kids while also saddling them with debt.

We're a democracy based on hope and love (freedom is bad, acktchually), and our cameras keep us safe. Also, parents wanted education to align better with The Real World, so we added constant surveillance and armed police to the classrooms and replaced a trip to the principal's office with a hearing at the local magistrate.

Only a radical, alt-right, white supremacist-fascist would consider our lawful, peace-keeping panopticon to be "authoritarian" - won't you please think of The Children?

What are you so afraid of? What are you hiding?

/s

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.