<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Pink Recovery&#8230;interesting, but misses the point</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whyboysfail.com/2009/08/18/the-pink-recoveryinteresting-but-misses-the-point/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whyboysfail.com/2009/08/18/the-pink-recoveryinteresting-but-misses-the-point/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.whyboysfail.com/2009/08/18/the-pink-recoveryinteresting-but-misses-the-point/#comment-11752</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:36:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whyboysfail.com/?p=972#comment-11752</guid>
		<description>The article mentioned the GI Bill.  The "new" GI Bill is about to go into effect.  It won't have the impact of the "old" GI Bill because there are far fewer veterans to take advantage of it.  Something like 10% of the population was in the military during World War 2.  Now it is something like 1%.  The "old" GI Bill certainly made it possible for lots of men to go to college and get a further leg up.  The "new" GI Bill, within its smaller base of recipients could be expected to have much the same effect, since most of the beneficiaries would be expected to be men, but this time they put in the law that it can be used for the dependents of the veterans, rather than just the veterans themselves.  You can bet that, since more girls are graduating from high school, those dependents who will benefit will more likely be girls.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article mentioned the GI Bill.  The &#8220;new&#8221; GI Bill is about to go into effect.  It won&#8217;t have the impact of the &#8220;old&#8221; GI Bill because there are far fewer veterans to take advantage of it.  Something like 10% of the population was in the military during World War 2.  Now it is something like 1%.  The &#8220;old&#8221; GI Bill certainly made it possible for lots of men to go to college and get a further leg up.  The &#8220;new&#8221; GI Bill, within its smaller base of recipients could be expected to have much the same effect, since most of the beneficiaries would be expected to be men, but this time they put in the law that it can be used for the dependents of the veterans, rather than just the veterans themselves.  You can bet that, since more girls are graduating from high school, those dependents who will benefit will more likely be girls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
