Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
I think so. I believe working parents shouldn't be placed with the burden of having to pay for their child to be watched by a group of people, who may not even have the experience. With the government, they can fund and build the appropriate centers and supervise all employees.
I really agree with this idea. It's extremely hard these days to raise a family on only one income. In the North East specifically around NY and NJ it's pretty much impossible. If there were reliable, safe, and responsible public funded day care it would allow both mother and father to work during the day.
It's an unfortunate side effect that the child would spend so much day-time away from it's parents, but the alternative in many cases would be that the couple would not/will not have a child with reduced means to continue supporting themselves, let alone a vulnerable child.
I don't see a down side to this.
Perhaps not the government but the employers providing the day care. With government control there is a danger of indoctrination.
I understand that many churches offer free and low cost day care too.
I don't want my tax dollars spent on more projects that will become boondoggles that will inflate the deficit. The money has to come from somewhere.
What? Not only do you want the government to tax you to death, but raise your children for you too?
Why don't you just say it . . . You want the USA to become a COMMUNIST nation.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. B)
What you fail to understand though papadawg is that there is an unbalanced system now where homes cost ten times as much as they did when you were my age, and the average salary has barely doubled. On Long Island a two bedroom home in Nassau county costs $350,000. Where a home there 40 years ago would cost about $35,000. A working man or woman with a college degree could get a job with a salary of about 18,000-25,000… now the salary is only in the 45,000-55,000 range. It's impossible to own a home with only one income.
You can rent, but a civilized place to live will cost you $1,700 a month whichis more thean a mortgage payment in most places.
No, I'm not a communist, nor do I appreciate having words put in my own mouth regarding it. But frankly, the current generation(25-40 years old) of responsible adults has it pretty hard trying to provide shelter and food for their families. And I'll tell you something, it's not US who made the situation this way, but we're being forced to live with it all the same!
$1,700 a month? Where do you live, New York City or California? You don't get inflated housing costs like that without the government 'regulating' the housing market. You can also blame the Federal Reserve for the decreased purchasing power of your dollar. The government IS the problem and I'm not willing to sell the next generation's future down the tubes like our parents did to us to make things easier for me now.
A single bedroom rentable apartment in Suffolk county NY (Long Island) is $1700/month excluding utilities. So I'd still have to pay electricity, water, and heat…. But this is where my work is. I have an engineering degree, I have to live where there are several engineering houses. I could buy a housse much cheaper in North Carolina or Dakota or even Western Penn, but there is no work for me out there.
So here it is, and I own a condo on Long Island because it's where we live, and I don't want to pay someone elses mortgage by renting. I work, I'm an engineer; my wife works, and she's a teacher. We're educated, kind, upstanding, patriotic, hard-working Americans…. and we can't afford to have a child and live on one income…. Thats not the American way.
No, the American way is if you were a high school dropout living with your girlfriend that you knocked up at age 17, living in section 8 housing subsidized by hard working taxpayers. That's the new American dream. And I live with my fiance and commute 4 hours a day to work as a computer programmer, so it's not that I'm not empathetic to your struggles. It's that the things that are causing the problems and making it difficult to get by are all the bureaucratic 'solutions' we're given. Here, read this: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/RentControl.ht…
? A lot of families can't afford to have their child taken care of. Also, the places have quality as well. Do you want your kid to be with a cheap day care center?
society today and u can ask any journalist or scientist. it is nearly impossable to raise a family on one income. so if there was child care for working parents it would be alot easier to support one. as said above u wont be spending time with your kid. thats why if day care was there we working parents could afford to do things with our kids after work or on weekends. this would make living so much easier on us.
This all sounds great and everything but where is the money going to come from? Plus, no one ever said people had to have kids in the first place. Parents want someone to watch their kids while they fulfill their own career goals then they shouldn't be having kids in the first place. They're your kids and you have every control over having them. Granted child care is expensive but if anything they should charge more if you break it down. Lets say you pay $720 a month for 1 child, that's about 20 days of care a month, $36 a day which means if the person working is only getting paid $8 an hour they're only getting paid for 4.5 hours of work but they watch children for 8. However most workers are in charge of 5 kids max. in most states. so lets say that person watches 5 kids, they're getting $22.50 an hour, but how much does it cost to run the facility, electricity, water, permits, licensing, snacks, toys and activities for the kids so subtract all that and the cost really is justified. I'm not against children in the least, they're wonderful but it shouldn't be the governments job to take care of the children you choose to bring into the world. It would be nice for parents to have a place to take their children while they work but it really is the parents responsibility. You should know the cost of having children before you have them.
I think there should be subidized daycare in place to support working families with childcare costs. I don't believe that parents should have to take their entire checks and pay for daycare, or that children should be denied enriching and safe environments while their parents who want to contribute to society and better themselves are out on the job.
There are arguments here about the cost to run a daycare, or not having kids if you can't afford it. Part of contributing to society is tied to having children. They help fuel our country—its a socialized expectation. I wonder just how many folks who have children or contemplating families even feel comfortable "doing the math" before having a child the way it has been suggested here. Working parents keep our economy strong. State and local governments have attested to this in their messaging around what subsidized daycare does exist for parents that want to get out and work.
In addition .. . .
And what about all the people out there that have invested in college educations both young and old who can't find jobs, or for those that do are underemployed—what about the hours and lack of pay and benefits they incur? If we can take billions in taxpayer dollars to produce soundless jets and helicopters for special NAVY SEAL missions, we can subsidize daycare. It is easier to support those under 165% of poverty than to assist the large bulk of families sitting at the poverty cusp and above and under the illusion that they are middle class.
Lastly . . . .
But like someone else mentioned—politics/policy is the direct adversary to doing what is right and fiscally sound. That's not what politics is about. There is a huge disconnect between those that make the policy and those that have to face the repercussions of those policies. Affordable childcare is not a priority. Childcare is a money making business and under intense regulatory scrutiny because of it. In this country we have a tendency to do nothing until something catastrophic happens, and I don't know about you but it makes me pretty angry that we have a deep seated history of not caring enough about our children to do the things we know collectively is right.