"Affordable Childcare"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Screw pay for your retirement? Who is going to wipe your a$$? probably not many with your attitude

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:23:35. If Clinton's Arkansas HIPPY program is so successful, why do Arkansas schools rank 41st out if 50 states? Have they slipped since she was First Lady of Arkansas?

why do you think I know all the answers? I just went to her website and found the section on childcare. I only heard about that for the first time tonight. I'm sure if you used the google, you could research that question. Could it be republican legislatures, the recession, a guy named Huckabee?

Ah there's the rub. All answers are on a website. A partisan website at that.

[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.

What portion of your income do you pay in taxes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But is it better for society that you stay home? Probably not. We're 30 and having our first child because we could just afford it now. We really wished we could have had the baby 5 years ago when we were first married. Luckily we can afford daycare, but I know that most of my peers cannot afford 2k a month in daycare and would still make excellent parents. I think the people who say that you should wait to have children mean that you should wait until out of college/trade school and then married.

The daycare gap is creating a truly unaffordable situation between the haves and the have nots. So many women want to work but aren't able to because their salaries wouldn't pay for daycare, especially once they have two children.

[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.

All of us belonged to a family even if we have no children now. A family is the most basic and important social unit we have. The outcomes for children who do not have families is terrible. Have you ever experienced a child who was in an orphanage or moved from one home to another? Families and the care of children are what make our country strong. Children need emotional stability and positive encouragement in order to have the chance to succeed in practically every other way in life. Saying you don't care about families is equivalent to saying you don't care about people and people are what build communities and countries (so you don't care about those either). It's just so basic that I can't wrap my mind around what you are saying. What kind of a world do you want to live in? Who took care of you when you were young?

I cannot relate to the PP at all. What do you want for your children and grandchildren?

[Anonymous]

But is it better for society that you stay home? Probably not

You do know that is quite debatable? I had my children very late and worked until then. Then, I made the choice to stay home--which, gratefully, we could afford. DH made a decent middle income salary. Of course, we gave up things. Nice house--but not fancy. Made do with old furniture. No fancy trips except to visit grandparents and a couple of trips to Disney. There are a lot of local excursions. Few restaurant dinners--but lots of youth sports.

I am grateful we could afford to do this. DH had long hours--I do not see how we could have managed had I been working outside the home.

Kids are grown now--and, I have no regrets.

No criticism here of women who choose to work--but, please don't tell me it is better for society. Maybe, because I worked for years before I had kids, I did not feel that pull to work. I'd been there and done that.

[Anonymous]

Luckily we can afford daycare, but I know that most of my peers cannot afford 2k a month in daycare and would still make excellent parents. I think the people who say that you should wait to have children mean that you should wait until out of college/trade school and then married.

The daycare gap is creating a truly unaffordable situation between the haves and the have nots. So many women want to work but aren't able to because their salaries wouldn't pay for daycare, especially once they have two children.

Yep. These are the people who should be encouraged to have children. The most responsible people are not having kids because they are, well, being responsible. They would make great parents. This is another way the middle class is shrinking.

[Anonymous]

2k childcare that's the problem right there

Look DC and other major cities are nuts from real estate prices to childcare costs etc

Subsidizing isn't the solution though. Look at healthcare you are taking from the middle class to give the lower class stuff for free.

The reality is if you aren't upper middle income you shouldn't be living in a high COL area. There are plenty of other palces around the country where you can survive on 10-15 bucks an hour

Rent is less than 700 for a nice big 1br and daycare is around 700 a month in many places around the country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2k childcare that's the problem right there

Look DC and other major cities are nuts from real estate prices to childcare costs etc

Subsidizing isn't the solution though. Look at healthcare you are taking from the middle class to give the lower class stuff for free.

The reality is if you aren't upper middle income you shouldn't be living in a high COL area. There are plenty of other palces around the country where you can survive on 10-15 bucks an hour

Rent is less than 700 for a nice big 1br and daycare is around 700 a month in many places around the country

Is there an award for the most elitist post ever on DCUM? And you want a family to live in a big 1 BR? I suspect PP was ditch delivered by a drab and raised by wolves.

[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.

What portion of your income do you pay in taxes?

I'm exempt (husband is a fed) but the tax rate here is outrageous - about 50% for most incomes. The sales tax is 21%, including food at the grocery store!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But is it better for society that you stay home? Probably not. We're 30 and having our first child because we could just afford it now. We really wished we could have had the baby 5 years ago when we were first married. Luckily we can afford daycare, but I know that most of my peers cannot afford 2k a month in daycare and would still make excellent parents. I think the people who say that you should wait to have children mean that you should wait until out of college/trade school and then married.

The daycare gap is creating a truly unaffordable situation between the haves and the have nots. So many women want to work but aren't able to because their salaries wouldn't pay for daycare, especially once they have two children.

Not everyone follows a tidy life trajectory. I put myself through school and graduated, finally, at thirty, and now have a toddler. Because my husband is a professional, I'll be able to start a career, but if he weren't? I'm not sure. In any case, I think it's a dangerous precedent to declare that only the educated and white collar are eligible to have children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Luckily we can afford daycare, but I know that most of my peers cannot afford 2k a month in daycare and would still make excellent parents. I think the people who say that you should wait to have children mean that you should wait until out of college/trade school and then married.

The daycare gap is creating a truly unaffordable situation between the haves and the have nots. So many women want to work but aren't able to because their salaries wouldn't pay for daycare, especially once they have two children.

Yep. These are the people who should be encouraged to have children. The most responsible people are not having kids because they are, well, being responsible. They would make great parents. This is another way the middle class is shrinking.

I'm PP above poster responded to, and in no way consider myself irresponsible because I made a working class income when I had a child. I think that's preposterous. And I consider myself a great parent, too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Exactly. Outsourcing the primary caregiving of your little children is actually a luxury if you expect "quality" care. Only the rich can indulge to presue their duel careers away from their homes and families. And even then, the quality of that care is questionable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2k childcare that's the problem right there

Look DC and other major cities are nuts from real estate prices to childcare costs etc

Subsidizing isn't the solution though. Look at healthcare you are taking from the middle class to give the lower class stuff for free.

The reality is if you aren't upper middle income you shouldn't be living in a high COL area. There are plenty of other palces around the country where you can survive on 10-15 bucks an hour

Rent is less than 700 for a nice big 1br and daycare is around 700 a month in many places around the country

Is there an award for the most elitist post ever on DCUM? And you want a family to live in a big 1 BR? I suspect PP was ditch delivered by a drab and raised by wolves.

FIne make it a 2br I don't care

Point being noone deserves to live anywhere or free healthcare or free childcare. Its called responsibiltiy and choosing an area where you can afford to live (of which there are plenty across the US) and/or making choices working hard/education to make more income to then afford to be able to live in higher COL areas. Call me elitist all you want. It's what normal people have been doing for generations instead of whining or demanding government do stuff for them