"Affordable Childcare"

[Anonymous]

Don't have kids if you can't afford them. Simple. Or you can hire someone before Trump sends them back home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's just a term politicians throw around. Means absolutely nothing.

I'm a republican and I would rather see subsidized childcare or free childcare than welfare. So many women are unable to work and pay for childcare because the childcare is too expensive. It would also help many poor children to be out of their houses and to be given food and quality instruction/play. Childcare for one baby is more than most people's rent and mortgages, it is for DH and I and we're middle class. I would also like to support universal pre-K and K (don't have full Kindergarten in Loudoun county). It's also a dream that children would arrive off their school bus around the same time that parents are getting home from work (4:30-5:00pm range). School days should match working hours. Instead of more class time, this could mean longer lunch hours, more recess or free play. [/quote

I totally agree with you. Republicans would never agree to this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

from affordable, high-quality childcare [b]for their babies

????could someone describe this? Is this government run? Home care? What is it?

Excellent question... Can anyone please answer this?

Also, where exactly would the funding from from??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just a term politicians throw around. Means absolutely nothing.

I'm a republican and I would rather see subsidized childcare or free childcare than welfare. So many women are unable to work and pay for childcare because the childcare is too expensive. It would also help many poor children to be out of their houses and to be given food and quality instruction/play. Childcare for one baby is more than most people's rent and mortgages, it is for DH and I and we're middle class. I would also like to support universal pre-K and K (don't have full Kindergarten in Loudoun county). It's also a dream that children would arrive off their school bus around the same time that parents are getting home from work (4:30-5:00pm range). School days should match working hours. Instead of more class time, this could mean longer lunch hours, more recess or free play.

I'm a democrat and I agree with you to an extent. However, the republicans refuse to do anything about the cost of childcare, even what you are proposing would be a no go for them.

(I don't think welfare should be gotten rid of entirely. Too many full time working parents qualify for SNAP, WIC , and Medicaid to get rid of them just yet. I think you're talking about cash assistance which is called TANF.)

Many companies could implement onsite childcare too, but they choose not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

+1

I live in Belgium which offers free, full-time childcare starting when a toddler is 2.5. I know many surrounding countries have even better benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what politicians (both D & R) mean when they say talk about affordable childcare? Are they talking about subsidizing, or regulating prices? I feel like it's a bait issue that is tossed around but with no real way to accomplish or solve. Please be nice- it's an honest question.

It means that those of us who didn't have children until we could afford them will end up paying for irresponsible people having unprotected sex. If you cannot afford child care, you cannot afford to have a child.

Except having a child today is unaffordable for many single parents and many two parent working families. I have nothing against 50 year olds having designer babies, but 24 year olds who are responsible and hardworking should be able to as well, without paying their entire income to quality childcare. There are parallels here to rising college tuition.
--a Republican for whom the best part of the convention was Ivanka Trump speaking to this
--a Republican who scrabbled for childcare when I was 24; looking out for the next gen. Yes, Republicans have hearts

and then people bitch at those who wait until they are late 30s/early 40s and need ART

We can't have it both ways, society.

+1

Not everyone earns a lot of money. I am working class and just could not make enough to justify the cost of childcare. It is cheaper for me to stay home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me what politicians (both D & R) mean when they say talk about affordable childcare? Are they talking about subsidizing, or regulating prices? I feel like it's a bait issue that is tossed around but with no real way to accomplish or solve. Please be nice- it's an honest question.

It means that those of us who didn't have children until we could afford them will end up paying for irresponsible people having unprotected sex. If you cannot afford child care, you cannot afford to have a child.

wait, what was that part about not supporting abortion or comprehensive sex ed?

Yeah, get the hell out of here with your nonsense

Yeah, see, that's the problem.

Republicans oppose anything but abstinence only sex Ed in schools (which has repeatedly been shown not to work) and access to birth control. They defund Planned Parethood, and oppose abortion.

Then, once the children they've left ignorant and unsupported have sex and the girls get pregnant, they blame them, shame them and make it virtually impossible for them to get an abortion (because they value life).

At the same time they oppose funding prenatal care and nutrition programs for the pregnant girls, increasing the likelihood that the "lives" they supposedly will be low birthweight, have special needs, etc. (because, after all, why should the "responsible" people have to pay for those sluts who can't keep their legs together), and then they vote to cut things like Head Start, SNAP and other programs on the grounds that "welfare queens" are just churning out babies at society's expense.

They vote to cut education and job training programs that would help the young mothers advance themselves and break the cycle of poverty, and then blame the mothers and the kids who repeat the cycle and subsidize the prison industrial complex.

+1 trillion

Gotta love those family values!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

+1

I live in Belgium which offers free, full-time childcare starting when a toddler is 2.5. I know many surrounding countries have even better benefits.

Do you understand that most Europeans have a level of respect for parenting/childcare that most Americans simply don't have?

I've been in the field in both Europe and in the U.S. The difference is startling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

+1

I live in Belgium which offers free, full-time childcare starting when a toddler is 2.5. I know many surrounding countries have even better benefits.

Do you understand that most Europeans have a level of respect for parenting/childcare that most Americans simply don't have?

I've been in the field in both Europe and in the U.S. The difference is startling.

How can the gap be bridged?

[Anonymous]

If it means subsidizing it, I am dead set against it. Many childless folks choose to forgo children because they know they can't afford to pay for daycare and still live the lifestyle they want (with vacations and eating out and so forth in the budget). If you choose to have a baby, that $2000 daycare bill is on YOU and no one else. And don't bother with the "who will pay for your retirement" argument. It's old and tired and bullshit anyway. We all know SS will be bankrupt by then anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, many european countries have actual affordable childcare. they also have reasonable maternity leave policies.

+1

I live in Belgium which offers free, full-time childcare starting when a toddler is 2.5. I know many surrounding countries have even better benefits.

Do you understand that most Europeans have a level of respect for parenting/childcare that most Americans simply don't have?

I've been in the field in both Europe and in the U.S. The difference is startling.

How can the gap be bridged?

Good question. How can you erase the disrespect and disdain most Americans have for the actual work of taking care of babies and little children?

I saw for myself at the elite Bright Horizons daycare on L St in NW Washington. This is where the richest DC lawyers put their little children, and pay a fortune ($2000/month). Every single worker was a poor minority, some with broken English. They were clearly not happy to be doing their work. I observed them for over three hours. It was horrifying. Hence, the Hell of American Daycare. Google it. This sort of thing doesn't much exist in Europe, and certainly not in elite society the way it does here.

[Anonymous]

So we don't value families in this country. So what? Who cares? Who is to say we should? We value what we value and you have to be realistic about that. It is what it is and no amount of "shoulds" will make it any different.

Democrats love to bang their heads against walls. It's very puzzling to me. Much better to just be realistic about what the world around you is like imo.

[Anonymous]

I went in an expensive DC day care and the caregivers were listless rocking the cradles with their feet. I went in a subsidized one and the caregivers were swearing. I finally found my way the a cheerful home provider and later a nun run that was caring. Daycare options in D.C. are horrid. There are a few very good ones for the very rich who can get on the lists. Even the ft. Myers military one ( if you want an example of subsidized) they busted some caregivers for mistreatment. It is attitudinal and systemic. You need to start treating them as early child development centers, hire people with childcare education (those without can be assistants), pay more, and be respectful. - conservative who loves children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So we don't value families in this country. So what? Who cares? Who is to say we should? We value what we value and you have to be realistic about that. It is what it is and no amount of "shoulds" will make it any different.

Democrats love to bang their heads against walls. It's very puzzling to me. Much better to just be realistic about what the world around you is like imo.

Wow. That is quite the perspective!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's just a term politicians throw around. Means absolutely nothing.

I'm a republican and I would rather see subsidized childcare or free childcare than welfare. So many women are unable to work and pay for childcare because the childcare is too expensive. It would also help many poor children to be out of their houses and to be given food and quality instruction/play. Childcare for one baby is more than most people's rent and mortgages, it is for DH and I and we're middle class. I would also like to support universal pre-K and K (don't have full Kindergarten in Loudoun county). It's also a dream that children would arrive off their school bus around the same time that parents are getting home from work (4:30-5:00pm range). School days should match working hours. Instead of more class time, this could mean longer lunch hours, more recess or free play.

I am a Dem and agree with a lot of what you are proposing here - all sensible ideas, including allowing for more recess/free play. Legislatures need more women with common sense insights into what works for families.