Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Child Care Is So Expensive

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 522 posts

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#81

Post by shantly »

mkoryak wrote: post #22
FactolSarin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's necessarily woman-specific. I'm a guy, and if I could stay at home all day and spend time with my kids, I would too. Certainly, I would if my wife was making 330k/year :D

wait, are you saying that staying at home with the kids is not work?! It is arguably a harder job than most white collar jobs out there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWcJZ210AaM

Harder doesn't mean worse, necessarily. There are lots of things I'd rather do than my white collar programming job, and most of them are at least as much "work" as it is—they just don't pay nearly as well.

[EDIT] that includes staying home to teach my kids—much rather do that, and it'd 100% for sure be much harder. Pays zero dollars though, and someone's gotta keep the bills paid.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#82

Post by jariel »

davidw wrote: post #35
cortesoft wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be very careful about making that large a generalization (that all else being equal, women would prefer to stay home over working). Childcare is mind numbing work, especially with young kids. Sure, some women (and men) would prefer that, but a LOT of women prefer office work over raising children. "why not to enjoy life instead of spending 50-60 hours at the office?" is really selling short how much work rais…

> I would be very careful about making that large a generalization (that all else being equal, women would prefer to stay home over working). Especially within earshot of my wife. Stuff like that pisses her off to no end, with good reason. She's smart and accomplished and very much enjoys the challenges of a professional career.

[dead]

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#83

Post by stvswn »

cortesoft wrote: post #18
ChaosDegenerate wrote: post #6

The thing with female workforce participation: isn't it just symptom of the society getting poorer. My wife worked her ass off. I was making about 130k / year. She was making about 60k / year. Then we not only moved from the US to Poland (where live is just so much cheaper). But I also started making about 330k / year. All the willingness to work evaporated on her part :-) Instead we have another kid. She stopped tal…

I would be very careful about making that large a generalization (that all else being equal, women would prefer to stay home over working). Childcare is mind numbing work, especially with young kids. Sure, some women (and men) would prefer that, but a LOT of women prefer office work over raising children. "why not to enjoy life instead of spending 50-60 hours at the office?" is really selling short how much work rais…

Your point about childcare being difficult is absolutely correct, but I don't know if you're correct that a "LOT" of women (I assume you mean counterintuitively more than the commentor implied) would not want to stay home to raise them, all things considered. Based on personal relationships with my wife, sisters, and close family and friends I believe it is very, very common for mothers to find returning to work very difficult (even though it's a lot of work to stay home). I don't think anyone intends to imply that there aren't men who feel this way, that there aren't women who don't feel this way, or that the reason for anyone feeling this way is because work is hard and staying home with kids is easy.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#84

Post by SkyBelow »

mkoryak wrote: post #22
FactolSarin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's necessarily woman-specific. I'm a guy, and if I could stay at home all day and spend time with my kids, I would too. Certainly, I would if my wife was making 330k/year :D

wait, are you saying that staying at home with the kids is not work?! It is arguably a harder job than most white collar jobs out there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWcJZ210AaM

With a possible exception of before they can talk and are potty trained, child care is not harder. And it is far far more enjoyable spending time with your kids.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#85

Post by tathougies »

The easiest solution to 'child care' -- allow children to come to the office. Most people have cushy office jobs. Kids 0 - 5 do not take up much space.

Parents can take staggered lunch breaks to watch the children. Children would be in a common area that'd be appropriately gated off. In dual-income families, either mom or dad can take the child to their office.

Benefits:

(1) Both parents can work and be with their child

(2) Children see adults working, not just playing. This is good as children want to be like adults

(3) Non-parents get to spend time with babies and children, which is wonderful!

(4) For nursing working mothers, having the baby there would make nursing much easier than pumping. Babies could even be given little bassinets to sleep and wiggle around in near mom and dad, if they want that.

(5) The child/children can share in mom and dad's lunch.

(6) Cute babies in offices!!! How great is that!?

Speaking from personal experience, when my colleagues have been forced due to circumstance to bring their young children in to the office, the experience has always been positive. However, my colleagues seem worried that one of us may be offended and apologize incessantly. We should stop this and just make it a policy that children are allowed in-office. I mean, a lot of companies I've worked at have allowed dogs, which can't be potty trained, don't wear diapers, and sometimes bite people. Why are children treated worse than dogs?

EDIT: responses to this thread are the #1 reason why we will never have affordable childcare. Americans, as a group, highly highly dislike children, even if they won't admit it out of fear of sounding like a misanthrope.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#86

Post by jperras »

jawns wrote: post #25
jperras wrote: post #7

It doesn't have to be this way. Québec has had subsidized daycare for almost 25 years, and the program literally pays for itself (and more!) via increased income taxes from parents that would have otherwise chosen to stay at home. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/12/affordable-daycare-su... > In Montreal, Quebec’s largest city, a day of child care cost on average $10 in 2016 > Quebec’s program, which introduced lo…

I'm curious about the other side of the coin: Parents who would like to stay at home and provide care to their own children, but who feel as if they cannot because of financial constraints. Does this program do anything to help them?

That's actually one of the not-so-great facets of this program.

It demands a minimum of 80% participation, meaning that if you wanted to stay at home to take care of your children but use subsidized daycare 1-2 days a week to give yourself a break, it's currently not possible. If a child is absent for more than 20% of the "regular" schedule, then the daycare loses that subsidy spot due to it being under-utilized.

There's a movement to help correct this, but it's not simple due to how funds and resources are allocated and planned for.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#88

Post by ChaosDegenerate »

nathan_compton wrote: post #44
ChaosDegenerate wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but also it's not like having maternal instinct wouldn't make this decision easier for you. And keep in mind, statistics say than one of the divorce factors is husband making less than wife. From her perspective: this isn't sexy at all.

I'd interpret these results with a grain of salt. They are, after all, culturally (and circumstantially) bound. If making money wasn't so important to raising kids, then women might express quite different preferences in partners. I believe there is some evidence for this if you look at mate preference in nations with more social support. Just anecdotally, women seem to be interested in men who excel in some area, no…

Please keep in mind, I said socio-economic status. But, homeless looking, constantly drank, smelling of urine Charles Bukowski had plenty of young, attractive and willing lovers. My point being exactly his high socio-economic status. We're talking about one of the best American poets. How many of these you get to meet? Hey, he might even write a poem about feeling he has for you if he likes you. That's what was so damn hot about the guy. Not money. With no money at all, his status was extremely high. I'm not pushing this vulgar simplistic idea here that women are all about money. They are after men who are really, really good in their niche. Even when the niche doesn't provide any money. It's about status they're after. This usually translate into money, but not always. Bukowski was dirt poor. With high status.

EDIT: grammar

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#89

Post by jedberg »

jawns wrote: post #60
cortesoft wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be very careful about making that large a generalization (that all else being equal, women would prefer to stay home over working). Childcare is mind numbing work, especially with young kids. Sure, some women (and men) would prefer that, but a LOT of women prefer office work over raising children. "why not to enjoy life instead of spending 50-60 hours at the office?" is really selling short how much work rais…

> Childcare is mind numbing work > It is NOT enjoying life to stay home with toddlers. > I was so happy to be able to go back to work > the weekends are way more stressful than the weekdays I have to say, this kind of perspective on being a parent puzzles me, even though it's pretty widely held. Honestly, many parents I encounter seem almost as if they'd prefer to be their child's aunt or uncle than their mom or dad.…

Think of it this way. Imagine if when you went to work, you only got to do the "fun stuff" for a hour a day, and the rest of the day you just filled out paperwork and moved things back and forth in a predetermined pattern. And work lasted from the time you woke up to the time you slept.

Being a parent is the greatest joy I've ever known, but the joyful parts are the punctuation on the mind-numbing toil. That toil is only bearable because of the fun bits, but it's still there.

Being a parent is very important work, and can bring great joy, but it's possible to both love the joy and hate the toil in between.

Re: Why Child Care Is So Expensive

#90

Post by snarf21 »

legitster wrote: post #41

It really comes down to the ratio. Our state has a 4-1 ratio for infants (which is entirely reasonable). You are basically paying for 1/4 of a person's time. If you want to put them into a daycare where the worker is adequately paid, that's $6000 a year alone, let alone overhead costs for facilities/admin. No matter who pays for it, raising children is time consuming. And time is becoming more valuable.

Exactly right. People also forget that while the parent works 8 hours a day, the kid is dropped off before and after commute time which means the kid may be in daycare for 9 or 10 hours. So if you get infant care at $175/week for four infants divided by 50 hours, you get $14/hour and that is gross revenue to the business. If you happen to lose an infant to a parental move, now you are losing money for that class. You can do better on the 10+ kids because the ratios are much better.

As you said, we are valuing time more and more. I can't imagine what childcare would costs with a $15/hour minimum wage. A lot of mothers would probably be forced to give up their job.

Post reply on HN