How can we improve the childcare crisis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay parents to stay at home for the first three years. Universal child allowance. I suppose Republicans would only want to give to children of married parents though. Or maybe it could just be higher if it was a married couple. Social security credits for homemakers.

In another couple of years, there’s going to be significantly more babies.

HAHAHA. Absolutely not. And luckily, this will never,ever happen in the United States.

PP yup you’re right

And all this prolife bull about supporting families will turn into straight up punishing women within two years.

Can we just concede a middle ground? Women who want to live and work in liberal democratic states have all the liberties they want and in exchange the rest of the country is not forced to pay for the social welfare for every parent?

(P.S. - the fact that parents with 17-year-olds who could be working normal jobs were also getting the CTC is just so ridiculous)

"You can have rights in Vermont" is not *the middle ground*

Please go jump off a cliff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Low income cap? The CTC went out to households making up to $400,000.

Absolutely absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

So, your answer is to keep women out of the workforce?

Not women. There are SAHD and will be more and more of them. For the first year, a baby needs a parent. A grandparent can step in but a parent is best.

Ok, so how about a year of parental leave? Some of us can't afford to just leave our jobs and/or would have a lot of trouble getting a new one without moving cross-country. Other countries do this. It's possible.

Stop having children you can't afford.

Okay, so only the rich will have children. Who do you think will do almost every working and middle class job in America then?

Real middle class and lower income can get day care vouchers in this area. Its those of us who make too much to qualify but day care costs are the same as our take home pay that it makes it impossible to work.

For the poster who says a grandparent can step in. Mine live 10 minutes away, healthy and have never babysat even once in an emergency in 13 years. Can and will are two different things. I could be dying and my mom would still make up an excuse not to help.

Here's my thoughts - I know 'MC' people who bought $800K - $900K homes - which in this area you know is not some palatial estate but still acceptable - that were whining after they were stripped of a $1,200/month CTC.

Why should you get a daycare subsidy when you can afford and willingly bought a $1 million property? Why shouldn't you be expected to use your HHI, usually $150K - $400K, again seems high enough to me - to provide for your own children?

Real middle class don't make over $100K. Why are you even worried about people who earn that much or make poor housing choices? You will not get a subsidy on that kind of income so its really a non-issue.

According to DCUM, everyone under $250K is middle class. Make up your mind.

More like under $350-$400K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay teachers and childcare workers more. They can make almost as much working in fast food but are responsible for the health, safety, and education of your children.

Agree this is a core problem- but where would the money come from?

From the families who need childcare. Now, personally, I think childcare should be subsidized by the government, on a sliding scale for all families making less than 250K a year (and free for those making under about 100K) for up to 2 kids. And I think that if a parent decides to stay home, they should get the amount that they would be subsidized if they used outside childcare. But until then, parents have to decide if they can afford to pay enough to find reliable childcare.

LOL and this is why social welfare is just a never happening concept. You want to PAY stay at home moms to take care of their own children? What's to stop someone from having 9 kids and never working for 20 years.

You want to have kids, you pay for their care yourself until pre-k/kindergarten. Period.

I have to agree that this is crazy. People who SAH already aren’t paying taxes on their labor.

... you're so close.

No one pays taxes on their labor. We pay taxes on income. You are acknowledging that SAHPs are performing labor, but the conclusion you are drawing is that rather than compensate them for that labor, we force them to go do other labor somewhere else so that we can tax them on that, and then pay another person as little as humanly possible to care for their child so that we can tax that labor?

Lemme guess. You're a "fiscal conservative" who just cares about the budget deficit?

They are performing labor for their husband/spouses. Tell them to do what Japanese women do and have the company deposit the working spouse's paycheck directly under the spouses control. Or *gasp* have a conversation with your husband and have him split his paycheck 60/40 with you.

The rest of the country is not responsible for your decision to not work outside of the home.

- a Democrat

+1. Also a Democrat.

+2 Another Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay parents to stay at home for the first three years. Universal child allowance. I suppose Republicans would only want to give to children of married parents though. Or maybe it could just be higher if it was a married couple. Social security credits for homemakers.

In another couple of years, there’s going to be significantly more babies.

HAHAHA. Absolutely not. And luckily, this will never,ever happen in the United States.

PP yup you’re right

And all this prolife bull about supporting families will turn into straight up punishing women within two years.

Can we just concede a middle ground? Women who want to live and work in liberal democratic states have all the liberties they want and in exchange the rest of the country is not forced to pay for the social welfare for every parent?

(P.S. - the fact that parents with 17-year-olds who could be working normal jobs were also getting the CTC is just so ridiculous)

"You can have rights in Vermont" is not *the middle ground*

Please go jump off a cliff.

It is if you choose to live in Vermont. For my Texas friends I'm sorry but living in a state that makes being a woman a third-world problem is your choice. I've been told Austin is beautiful though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

Since you're fundamentally uninterested in recognizing any problem here, you might want to move along from this discussion.

There is no problem. Your children are not my problem or concern. What is it about this that none of you understand?

Ah a isolationist! You exist only in this world alone- is the correct? Nothing about how other people's children are raised or cared for impacts our society? Employment doesnt impact our society? Do you and your children not live in society? Do you understand what happens when there is no middle class or do you just hope to be on the rich side of that divide?

Your kids are your responsibility. There is zero reason you should be entitled to free child care. No, your employment doesn't impact society. Real middle class get child care help in this area. The problem are rich people claming to be middle class living in million dollar homes who expect hand outs.

Thank you! I'm so tired of the whining from the UMC meanwhile you find out their retirement + stock accounts are fat and flush. Give me a break.

I will never, as long as I live, forget the woman on DCUM during 2020 who threw the largest ongoing adult temper tantrum I have ever seen, with multiple furious, bile-spewing responses, who claimed she NEEDED THE SCHOOLS OPEN RIGHT NOW I DON’T CARE NOW NOW NOW because she “couldn’t afford childcare” while she worked. She blew an everloving gasket when she revealed that she had a several thousand dollar European vacation fund and people suggested she use that for childcare.

[Anonymous]

The reason I don't believe all these "I'm a woman and a Democrat and I oppose subsidized childcare" posts (which I bet are actually all from one troll), is that federal assistance for childcare is actually enormously popular, even among politically conservative voters.

"Some 78% of Republican voters say they want subsidized child care programs for working families where the typical family would pay around $45 a week, depending on their income, according to December 2020 polling conducted by First Five Years Fund (FFYF), a nonprofit that advocates for affordable early education.

An even higher share of Democratic voters (93%) support that scenario for subsidized child care, according to the poll.

A solid majority (79%) of Republican voters said they support tax credits to help working families pay for child care, and 63% said they want their member of Congress to work with Biden on child-care issues."

These "if you have kids you can stay home with them" trolls are in a tiny minority -- most Americans have kids, and most know childcare is not affordable, and most believe we as a society should subsidize it becasue otherwise people can't work. And since people working (and paying taxes) is kind of how this whole circus stays on the road, that's a problem.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americans-want-more-affordable-child-care-options-republican-voters-included-11619630948

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

So, your answer is to keep women out of the workforce?

Not women. There are SAHD and will be more and more of them. For the first year, a baby needs a parent. A grandparent can step in but a parent is best.

Ok, so how about a year of parental leave? Some of us can't afford to just leave our jobs and/or would have a lot of trouble getting a new one without moving cross-country. Other countries do this. It's possible.

Stop having children you can't afford.

Okay, so only the rich will have children. Who do you think will do almost every working and middle class job in America then?

Real middle class and lower income can get day care vouchers in this area. Its those of us who make too much to qualify but day care costs are the same as our take home pay that it makes it impossible to work.

For the poster who says a grandparent can step in. Mine live 10 minutes away, healthy and have never babysat even once in an emergency in 13 years. Can and will are two different things. I could be dying and my mom would still make up an excuse not to help.

Here's my thoughts - I know 'MC' people who bought $800K - $900K homes - which in this area you know is not some palatial estate but still acceptable - that were whining after they were stripped of a $1,200/month CTC.

Why should you get a daycare subsidy when you can afford and willingly bought a $1 million property? Why shouldn't you be expected to use your HHI, usually $150K - $400K, again seems high enough to me - to provide for your own children?

If you actually know such people, they are running a scam. Either their parents bought their homes or they are lying about how much they received in CTC or they are purposefully making their lives a living hell. Here's the math:

800k house means down payment of 80-160k, plus annual mortgage payments of about 45k. In order to qualify for $1200 in CTC, they would need to have four kids under age 6 (logistically challenging) AND they need to have an HHI of under 150k. Daycare for four kids in that age group is going to cost 60k at least (or maybe you find a nanny willing to take all four kids, but I don't see there being any savings because a nanny of 1-2 kids in DC easily costs 40k so good luck)

Let's say they make $149k to slide under the CTC cap, and assume some favorable taxes due to mortgage interest deduction, retirement savings, and having kids. Their take home is around $115k.

Minus 45k in mortgage payments = $70kk
Minus 60k in childcare = $10k

So you know multiple families who have 10k a year to pay for food, clothes, and other necessities, and their main concern is the CTC, which by the way they still qualify for, just a little less money and it is paid as a refund instead of monthly?

Let me save you the time of answering. No. You don't.

The expanded CTC was actually an additional $1,000 a year per a child and there were plenty of people authorized for the program who did not in fact have the annual income necessary to have $12,000 per child in tax deductions per year.

Second, your assumption that each family is paying 20% - 30% as a down payment and/or in closing costs of their housing expenses is also faulty. I know plenty of people who just scrapped up 5% and got in with what they had.

Third, the family I referenced has 2 kids over the age of 12 and 2 kids under 5. The difference is or was $1,100/month in cash deposits. If you want to discount the extra $100/month have at it. But their childcare costs are roughly $3,200/month plus benefits - the nanny watches the two kids on a schedule which is $38K a year not $45K.

Based on your calculations, their housing is paid for, their childcare is paid for, and they an extra $1,000/month for incidentals. Plus the childcare costs are temporary until pre-K enrollment. I don't see the problem or why the government needs to subsidize them or anyone else.

If you put down 5% on an 800k home, you are now paying 5k+ per month on your mortgage (plus you are paying PMI). This actually makes the math worse than what I offered because you could argue that their parents gave them the down payment, but very few people have family willing to help them pay their mortgage. Which means now their annual mortgage costs more like 60k.

Good job looking up the actual rules on the advanced CTC payments for your imaginary family so that your math on that technically makes sense, but now that their imaginary mortgage payment is higher, they still only have $17k a year for food and incidentals. Since feeding a family of six that includes 2 teenagers is going to cost you around 1k, and doctors co-pays suck up the rest, I guess their kids do no activities and have no friends. And no money for any of their four kids to go college either. I'd feel really sad for this family if you hadn't invented them for the sole purpose of making a point that, by the way, you have still failed to make.

Zero empathy for a family who makes those choices.

This family does not exist, so it's smart to save your empathy for actual people.

An actual family of 6 with less than 150k in income cannot afford an 800k house in DC (would never get approved, would never be able to save for the down payment, would never be able to afford the mortgage payment. That family would be living in an exurb, commuting 45 minutes each way, and drowning in debt.

It is unlikely they would have childcare costs at all because they'd probably sacrifice the mom's 60k salary (which would not even cover childcare expenses after taxes) and live on the husband's 90k salary while she stayed home. This would save them hundreds of thousands of dollars but she'd have to stay out of the workforce for so long that it would would torpedo her career, and they'd be stuck trying to save for retirement and college for four kids on one salary plus whatever she could find, making probably a fraction of her prior salary (plus she needs flexibility because even once in school, her kids have vacation days, holidays, and sick days, and they have a very slim budget for camps and emergency childcare. And that budget might be slightly augmented by CTC but not enough to help them spend a million on a house.

I guess you can be mad they had four kids. But to give you a sense of what reality looks like, we're a family with one kid on a 130k, we own a 1000 sq ft house we bought for 400k 8 years ago. We have one 15 year old car. We used CTC to buy better quality food for our kid (more fresh fruits and vegetables, fewer processed foods which are cheap and kept our grocery bills down), pay for dentist visits (we are not offered dental insurance through work), buy school uniforms when she went through a growth spurt (it's a public school, don't worry), and enroll her in an inexpensive gymnastics class at the Y because her pediatrician says she needs to work on coordination and her teacher says she lacks confidence.

I don't actually care if you empathize with me or not (truly, don't give two sh!ts what you think of me) but thought it would be useful to provide a picture of what an actual family benefitting from CTC looks like.

And yes, we should overhaul the childcare system with more paid parental leave and subsidized childcare programs so that we can pay childcare workers a living wage for hard work without bankrupting families. Both my mom and I have worked in childcare facilities and it is hard and draining work, but as a parent myself I know how hard it is to find quality care in budget. The reason my kid is an only is that we simply cannot afford to have more. And we are two college graduates (I have the loans to prove it) in white collar professions (DH is an engineer for a public agency, I'm a teacher) who are careful with money and do not live beyond our means. If we are just barely making this work, I have trouble understanding how families with less stable jobs, more kids, less education, or all of the above make it work.

So you and your spouse are clearing $5,000 a month, have a mortgage of $2,000 a month or less, have a short commute or no commute (single car), and the only thing you want the CTC for is extra vegetables and gymnastic classes.

I'm not exactly sure why you or someone like you is 'struggling' enough to need free unearned monthly payments.

No one said struggling -- we are making it work. Our mortgage is 2600/mo and my DH commutes almost an hour each way though (not by car). And what do you have against vegetables and exercise for kids? The federal government gave out billions in loans to businesses for Covid relief, forgave a huge portion of them, and a significant portion turned out to have been fraudulently obtained. But I'm the one hasn't earned a $300/mo payment to help make sure my kid eats healthy and gets dental care? Ok.

Flush this country down the toilet, we'll see how it goes for y'all.

Nothing. If their parents pay for them and not the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

Since you're fundamentally uninterested in recognizing any problem here, you might want to move along from this discussion.

There is no problem. Your children are not my problem or concern. What is it about this that none of you understand?

Ah a isolationist! You exist only in this world alone- is the correct? Nothing about how other people's children are raised or cared for impacts our society? Employment doesnt impact our society? Do you and your children not live in society? Do you understand what happens when there is no middle class or do you just hope to be on the rich side of that divide?

Your kids are your responsibility. There is zero reason you should be entitled to free child care. No, your employment doesn't impact society. Real middle class get child care help in this area. The problem are rich people claming to be middle class living in million dollar homes who expect hand outs.

Thank you! I'm so tired of the whining from the UMC meanwhile you find out their retirement + stock accounts are fat and flush. Give me a break.

I will never, as long as I live, forget the woman on DCUM during 2020 who threw the largest ongoing adult temper tantrum I have ever seen, with multiple furious, bile-spewing responses, who claimed she NEEDED THE SCHOOLS OPEN RIGHT NOW I DON’T CARE NOW NOW NOW because she “couldn’t afford childcare” while she worked. She blew an everloving gasket when she revealed that she had a several thousand dollar European vacation fund and people suggested she use that for childcare.

Don't forget the ones who voted for Youngkin because having the kids in the same space meant they couldn't make their pilates classes and Starbucks runs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

Since you're fundamentally uninterested in recognizing any problem here, you might want to move along from this discussion.

There is no problem. Your children are not my problem or concern. What is it about this that none of you understand?

Ah a isolationist! You exist only in this world alone- is the correct? Nothing about how other people's children are raised or cared for impacts our society? Employment doesnt impact our society? Do you and your children not live in society? Do you understand what happens when there is no middle class or do you just hope to be on the rich side of that divide?

Your kids are your responsibility. There is zero reason you should be entitled to free child care. No, your employment doesn't impact society. Real middle class get child care help in this area. The problem are rich people claming to be middle class living in million dollar homes who expect hand outs.

Thank you! I'm so tired of the whining from the UMC meanwhile you find out their retirement + stock accounts are fat and flush. Give me a break.

I will never, as long as I live, forget the woman on DCUM during 2020 who threw the largest ongoing adult temper tantrum I have ever seen, with multiple furious, bile-spewing responses, who claimed she NEEDED THE SCHOOLS OPEN RIGHT NOW I DON’T CARE NOW NOW NOW because she “couldn’t afford childcare” while she worked. She blew an everloving gasket when she revealed that she had a several thousand dollar European vacation fund and people suggested she use that for childcare.

It's weird that you are very opposed to subsidizing childcare but you were fine with your tax dollars paying for schools that were closed to students, all to stick it to some anonymous woman on the internet. What a consistent and reasoned fiscal policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason I don't believe all these "I'm a woman and a Democrat and I oppose subsidized childcare" posts (which I bet are actually all from one troll), is that federal assistance for childcare is actually enormously popular, even among politically conservative voters.

"Some 78% of Republican voters say they want subsidized child care programs for working families where the typical family would pay around $45 a week, depending on their income, according to December 2020 polling conducted by First Five Years Fund (FFYF), a nonprofit that advocates for affordable early education.

An even higher share of Democratic voters (93%) support that scenario for subsidized child care, according to the poll.

A solid majority (79%) of Republican voters said they support tax credits to help working families pay for child care, and 63% said they want their member of Congress to work with Biden on child-care issues."

These "if you have kids you can stay home with them" trolls are in a tiny minority -- most Americans have kids, and most know childcare is not affordable, and most believe we as a society should subsidize it becasue otherwise people can't work. And since people working (and paying taxes) is kind of how this whole circus stays on the road, that's a problem.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americans-want-more-affordable-child-care-options-republican-voters-included-11619630948

Another tired lie. We are not one person. Ask Jeff.

I support subsidized childcare too — FOR TRULY LOW INCOME PEOPLE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT, not entitled people who want it, like most of the people seen here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

Since you're fundamentally uninterested in recognizing any problem here, you might want to move along from this discussion.

There is no problem. Your children are not my problem or concern. What is it about this that none of you understand?

Ah a isolationist! You exist only in this world alone- is the correct? Nothing about how other people's children are raised or cared for impacts our society? Employment doesnt impact our society? Do you and your children not live in society? Do you understand what happens when there is no middle class or do you just hope to be on the rich side of that divide?

Your kids are your responsibility. There is zero reason you should be entitled to free child care. No, your employment doesn't impact society. Real middle class get child care help in this area. The problem are rich people claming to be middle class living in million dollar homes who expect hand outs.

Thank you! I'm so tired of the whining from the UMC meanwhile you find out their retirement + stock accounts are fat and flush. Give me a break.

I will never, as long as I live, forget the woman on DCUM during 2020 who threw the largest ongoing adult temper tantrum I have ever seen, with multiple furious, bile-spewing responses, who claimed she NEEDED THE SCHOOLS OPEN RIGHT NOW I DON’T CARE NOW NOW NOW because she “couldn’t afford childcare” while she worked. She blew an everloving gasket when she revealed that she had a several thousand dollar European vacation fund and people suggested she use that for childcare.

It's weird that you are very opposed to subsidizing childcare but you were fine with your tax dollars paying for schools that were closed to students, all to stick it to some anonymous woman on the internet. What a consistent and reasoned fiscal policy.

They weren’t “closed.” Services were provided. You didn’t like them, but that’s too damn bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason I don't believe all these "I'm a woman and a Democrat and I oppose subsidized childcare" posts (which I bet are actually all from one troll), is that federal assistance for childcare is actually enormously popular, even among politically conservative voters.

"Some 78% of Republican voters say they want subsidized child care programs for working families where the typical family would pay around $45 a week, depending on their income, according to December 2020 polling conducted by First Five Years Fund (FFYF), a nonprofit that advocates for affordable early education.

An even higher share of Democratic voters (93%) support that scenario for subsidized child care, according to the poll.

A solid majority (79%) of Republican voters said they support tax credits to help working families pay for child care, and 63% said they want their member of Congress to work with Biden on child-care issues."

These "if you have kids you can stay home with them" trolls are in a tiny minority -- most Americans have kids, and most know childcare is not affordable, and most believe we as a society should subsidize it becasue otherwise people can't work. And since people working (and paying taxes) is kind of how this whole circus stays on the road, that's a problem.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americans-want-more-affordable-child-care-options-republican-voters-included-11619630948

Yes, please keep sharing 2020 polls. Meanwhile 2021-2022 showed those subsidized programs were actually not popular when people realized the economic costs of inflation.

Even worse than popularity, the majority of Americans just didn't care about the programs because guess what? They didn't benefit from them.

Voters aren’t all that enthused. Just 41% of respondents in a recent NPR/Marist poll said they support the BBB legislation, with 34% opposed and 25% unsure. Support for the bipartisan infrastructure bill Biden signed in November was 56%. That 15-point gap in support is the difference between legislation Americans want Congress to pass, and legislation they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insane waitlists for daycare.

The nanny shortage.

The lack of parental leave.

What can reasonably be done to even take a step in the right direction?

Stay home and you take care of your children. I did. Why can't you?

Since you're fundamentally uninterested in recognizing any problem here, you might want to move along from this discussion.

There is no problem. Your children are not my problem or concern. What is it about this that none of you understand?

Ah a isolationist! You exist only in this world alone- is the correct? Nothing about how other people's children are raised or cared for impacts our society? Employment doesnt impact our society? Do you and your children not live in society? Do you understand what happens when there is no middle class or do you just hope to be on the rich side of that divide?

Your kids are your responsibility. There is zero reason you should be entitled to free child care. No, your employment doesn't impact society. Real middle class get child care help in this area. The problem are rich people claming to be middle class living in million dollar homes who expect hand outs.

Thank you! I'm so tired of the whining from the UMC meanwhile you find out their retirement + stock accounts are fat and flush. Give me a break.

I will never, as long as I live, forget the woman on DCUM during 2020 who threw the largest ongoing adult temper tantrum I have ever seen, with multiple furious, bile-spewing responses, who claimed she NEEDED THE SCHOOLS OPEN RIGHT NOW I DON’T CARE NOW NOW NOW because she “couldn’t afford childcare” while she worked. She blew an everloving gasket when she revealed that she had a several thousand dollar European vacation fund and people suggested she use that for childcare.

Don't forget the ones who voted for Youngkin because having the kids in the same space meant they couldn't make their pilates classes and Starbucks runs

Nauseating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re in Maryland you need to listen up. The childcare crisis is going to get worse. So much worse! The State will expand pre-K3 and pre-K for programs throughout the entire state. Sounds good, right? For many daycares this is bad news and at our conferences a lot of daycare’s will be closing because they will be losing a huge portion of their children. With only two infant spots, if your home daycare, I am, that leaves you with infants and two year olds which is not sustainable.

The state also wants providers to get a college degree in early childhood education. This means if you have any other degree it is not valid. many women work from early in the morning till late at night when do they expect us to go back to school to get a degree? We are tired, we are burnt out and we have our own families that we need to care for on top of the children we care for during the day.

As it is people are ready scoff at $275-$325 a week, how much more are they willing to pay for a daycare with a early childhood education degree? It won’t be enough to cover the tuition and time that will go into it, never mind the abuse that many face from parents. People disrespect providers by bringing in sick children, not paying on time, dropping off early or picking up late.

The childcare crisis has many facets and that is my point of you about a major driving force. Adding the extra pressure and requirements from the state will mean more daycares will leave the profession entirely which ultimately is bad news for parents.

Yep, this happened already in DC and many centers had to close because it is so expensive to care for infants and toddlers without having their slots subsidized by preschoolers!

On the other hand as a consumer I have to pay for 0-6 years of daycare because nothing is free until K and my son turns 5 in January so he will basically be 5.75 when he enters K. If I only needed to pay for years 0.5/1-3 it would be a different calculation. Having the first 6 months of maternity leave possibly combined with 3-6 months paternity means the 1st year is covered. I only need to work about age 1- turning 3 for preK3.

Good for you, but not many people get that much leave

I don't have that much leave I actually had no maternity leave. As the person above me stated the most expensive part of daycare and most vulnerable children are those who are under a year and so if you can at least get to 6 months for maternity leave and then provide 3 to 6 months for attorney lately you can likely get most children to 9 months to 12 months without non parental care.

I absolutely needed 3 months to recover from childbirth and a C-section while taking care of an infant on my own because my partner had to go back at day 4. I got 0. No maternity leave no disability nothing.

And, you didn't know this prior to getting pregnant?

No I did not know that after a failed condom plus failure of plan B that I was pregnant. And further more I did not know that I would have complications with my c-section (didnt plan on a csection at all) nor a baby with health issues nor PPA. But thanks Susan you are a real peach!

You didn't have to carry the pregnancy or could have chosen adoption.

No one has maternity leave. Many of us save it up for years to be able to take 3 months off paid. I worked for 10 years and rarely took a vacation/sick leave so I could have paid maternity leave. And, yes, my kid had lots of health issues. I quit and we figured it out.

NP. But then what would she have to whine about for the rest of her life?