NY Mag: Daycare is Broken

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

This. And they do shift work.

[Anonymous]

It's always been broken. And while regulation may increase costs it is actually for a good reason so don't get rid of regulation. But they need subsidies for all daycare. Rent or maybe an exemption from payroll tax. Though I agree that for 2s and under especially, requiring a college degree is terrible. Our nanny was great and never went to college. Very few parents have ece degrees and they can still be good parents. And my PhD in economics makes me no more qualified to provide care at a childcare center than my nanny. If given the option a daycare should hire her not me.

[Anonymous]

For the above comment I'll add that cpr and first aid training, and a few classes are good to requirem. But that is way different than a degree that requires a bunch of gen ed classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a classic case of Millennial navel-gazing. When it was happening to Gen-X parents no one cared. But now that it's happening to millennials it's a huge deal that warrants hand-wringing and media coverage.

I know wayyyy more Gen X couples who could afford for one parent to stay home than Millennials. The spike in housing costs has been no joke for family planning and budgeting.

Or, maybe it is the housing choices we make. We picked a very small cheaper house so I could stay home. Some of it is about life choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

This. And they do shift work.

Huh???? So low income people MUST depend on family for childcare? You sound quite ignorant. I was a decently paid professional with no family and I struggled. So the solution for poor people is just use family? DCUM you never disappoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP and here is another snippet
"Biden’s Build Back Better legislation would have provided universal preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds and expanded access to high-quality child care for low- and middle-income children."

Thank god this legislation did not pass and no one should ever think this is some great idea or vote for it. It's a truly terrible idea that would make daycare instantly more expensive for those in the DC area. If you think your daycare bill is large now, expect it to triple if something like this were to pass.

It shows how misguided lawmakers are regarding what daycare is and what is needed.

3 and 4 yrs old are relatively cheap for daycares and the cost for that can be less. Strip that away and daycare centers are left with the costly infant and toddler rooms that require several staff to cover all shifts and can only accommodate a small number of kids. Centers like those wouldn't even be able break even unless they started charging more. A lot more.

And daycare is needed for infants and toddlers as well NOT just 3 years and up.

We are still wanting to cling to the belief that it is 1950 and daycare is extraneous. What we have to do and what politicians have to do is accept it is reality - just like K-12 school. And that's what has to happen. There has to be a public portion of all daycare centers to subsidize the cost of all daycares across the county. Teachers have to be paid similar to public school teachers and there has to be public money plus private pay money.

The idea that only low income parents need child care subsidies also has to go away. Subsidies have to extend to families that are in middle incomes for their specific area - not a national average. In DC, I would argue that families of 3 - two adults, one kid - making up to $175K likely need a subsidy in order to not be drowning each month.

How absolutely asinine. Make better choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

This. And they do shift work.

Yup. But DCUMers lose their damn minds every time this is suggested when they complain they can’t afford childcare.

“But…but….I’m ENTITLED to make 6+ figures at a cushy desk job, only on the schedule I prefer, and I simply *cannot* work opposite shifts with my spouse to save on childcare anyway, because I must spend every waking moment with my spouse fOr mY mEnTaL hEaLtH.”

OK, then find a way to pay for that childcare and quit whining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

Specify "certain income". I'm guessing you're talking about people making under 50k or so. Sometimes people in this bracket can also qualify for subsidized childcare.

But as with many things, the pinch occurs for people who make more than that but still not enough to really afford childcare. In DC, families making between 50k and 100k. If your HHI is 100k, you cannot afford to spend 20-40k on childcare for one or two kids. It's not an option unless you have no living expenses or something. But you may not have family help. And you also are unlikely to qualify for much assistance on childcare.

We were just above this bracket when we had one kid and determined (1) we'd never have another because it would just not be financially wise, and (2) I wound up becoming a SAHM because it netted us more money. I re-entered the workforce once our kid was in school, but that took longer than expected due to Covid. I actually liked that time with my child, but it definitely wasn't the original plan and while it made financial sense at the time, I do worry it cost me earnings in the long run due to the career disruption.

It's frustrating to see articles like this as though this is a new problem. Childcare has been a huge problem for years. I think part of it is that due to Covid, the problem is touching people in higher tax brackets due to scarcity. But those of us with lower incomes have been dealing with scarcity and unaffordability for years. You shouldn't need to make 150k+ to have kids.

[Anonymous]

I'm in the gray area where I make too much to qualify for vouchers but not by much. It's tough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

This. And they do shift work.

Yup. But DCUMers lose their damn minds every time this is suggested when they complain they can’t afford childcare.

“But…but….I’m ENTITLED to make 6+ figures at a cushy desk job, only on the schedule I prefer, and I simply *cannot* work opposite shifts with my spouse to save on childcare anyway, because I must spend every waking moment with my spouse fOr mY mEnTaL hEaLtH.”

OK, then find a way to pay for that childcare and quit whining.

What are you even talking about, you sound insane.

[Anonymous]

It's amazing to see people continue to act like this isn't a problem no matter how bad it gets. And the burden just mostly falls on moms. Even the "if you can't afford childcare, don't have kids" people don't get that the problem isn't just affordability, it's scarcity. And scarcity is getting worse because daycare workers can barely live on their income, plus they get sick constantly and their jobs are hard. So no one wants to do it.

You can hand waive this away if you want, but then you don't get to complain about how young people aren't choosing have kids or how the tax base is shrinking right when your Social Security is supposed to kick in. This is a ticking time bomb with real implications for all of society but go ahead and keep ignoring it or treating it as a personal responsibility problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

You might be on to something here. If you can’t support the raising of your child, don’t have one. If yo can, which includes daycare, have one, even two! Great idea!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

I think you missed the point of my math. Which was not to prove this was a good idea socially or anything, just to show that the daycare was probably not price gouging and that the problem/solution was structural and societal not something an individual daycare could fix. I’m the PP who pays $45K and it’s not even slightly reasonable. It’s more than twice my rent and the largest item in my budget. I even work for a company that does dependent care FSA and that’s a total joke — you can only put aside like $5K annually.

Something needs to change because people working at daycares are already paid less they deserve; parents using daycares are barely able to afford it; and there’s a whole class in between that ends up forcing at least one parent (usually a mom) off of their career track or out of the workforce entirely. And no, it’s definitely not a new thing. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to fix it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that 45K for two kids sounds reasonable does not obviate the problem that it’s unaffordable for most. Unless we only want Rich people having kids (and workers earning peanuts) we need a better solution.

Most people under a certain income bracket don’t pay for daycare. They hav family members watch the kids or older siblings watch the kids.

I don't understand how this works- shouldn't older siblings....be in school? Also it would have to be a wide spread in ages for that even to be appropriate during non-school hours. And not everyone has family nearby that are capable of being a fulltime caregiver either.