Kentucky made child care free for child care workers • Hacker News Board

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#151

Post by em-bee » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 9:56 PM UTC

lliamander wrote: post #134

api wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Density increase isn’t the only angle. That’s why I also listed telework, transportation, etc. We need a multi pronged approach. Basically any policy that improves housing affordability without too much negative or perverse incentive elsewhere should be favored.

Density also comes with it's own problems - crime, pollution, disease, and a loss in personal freedom necessary to keep those other problems at bay. None of that is ideal for family formation. And increasing density only works up to a point. Once you can no longer increase density, the prices start climbing back up. I think rezoning for more mixed use neighborhoods is a good idea, and some high-density living is good…

exactly how does density increase crime?

searching for an answer i found this:

https://nycdatascience.com/blog/student-works/data-study-on-...

which observes that crime increases up to a density of 500 people per square mile, but then decreases as the population density increases further.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#152

Post by readthenotes1 » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 10:18 PM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #119

readthenotes1 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US tax provided school system doesn't seem to do a great job at educating. Why should we support a broken system?

because simply stopping to support it and running off to do your own thing is going to make it worse. what is needed is more funding and a push for reform.

Chicago and Baltimore spend tons of money for their school system with poor outcomes.

Just supplying more money to a system almost never fixes anything about a broken system.

A few years ago the Chicago teachers Union leader pointed out that part of the trouble with trying to teach students is that they do not have a secure home life. You're not going to fix that by giving more money to school administrators.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#153

Post by em-bee » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 10:50 PM UTC

readthenotes1 wrote: post #152

em-bee wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because simply stopping to support it and running off to do your own thing is going to make it worse. what is needed is more funding and a push for reform.

Chicago and Baltimore spend tons of money for their school system with poor outcomes. Just supplying more money to a system almost never fixes anything about a broken system. A few years ago the Chicago teachers Union leader pointed out that part of the trouble with trying to teach students is that they do not have a secure home life. You're not going to fix that by giving more money to school administrators.

Just supplying more money to a system almost never fixes anything about a broken system.

of course, hence the need to also push for reform

the trouble with trying to teach students is that they do not have a secure home life

i am aware of that, and i realize that more needs to be done than to just improve schools. but this subthread was about taking money away from schools because they are not good enough. not about students struggling because they have a bad home. those are related but different issues.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#154

Post by RoyalHenOil » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 11:11 PM UTC

anonporridge wrote: post #99

toomuchtodo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Universal childcare. Alternatively, payment for children These are the same, just different execution. A slot for your child or children if you want to go to work, a payment if you want to stay at home to provide childcare. The care is universal, the delta being who logistically is providing the care. Edit: Agree with y'all it is both a marketing and execution story.

Similar to managed welfare vs UBI. One is creating defined resources and using bureaucracy to divvy them out and force people into buckets they might not be happy with. e.g. here's your government cheese. The other empowers individuals to make their own decisions with cash and lets the free market figure out how best to mine those dollars from the individuals receiving them. I suspect which option a person thinks is…

I oppose UBI for unrelated reasons: giving everyone money (if it is actually a life-changing amount of money) is unaffordable. It's hugely wasteful to give money to wealthy people.

Instead, I would prefer a system where people receive payments relative to income, like a reverse tax system. This way, people in higher income brackets pay in (in the form of taxes) and people in lower income brackets get a pay out.

This is far more affordable than UBI, meaning we can actually do it, and also puts money where it is most needed.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#155

Post by KMag » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

nuancebydefault wrote: post #142

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> couldn’t we come up with a subsidy with less market distortion? Yes. Universal childcare. Alternatively, payment for children (as a refundable tax credit or e.g. social security payment for one's first N years).

Is payment for children not a world-wide established thing (except 3rd world I suppose)?

In the US, it's a $2,000 tax credit per kid, so you effectively only get paid if your household income is high enough to owe federal income tax, and low enough that the 5% phase-out doesn't eat up the whole benefit. Also, it comes off of your taxable income, so the net benefit to your pocket is (1.0 - marginal_tax_rate) * benefit.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#156

Post by lotsoweiners » Sat, Oct 07, 2023, 1:10 AM UTC

mrits wrote: post #40

steven-xu wrote: post #9

Setting aside the philosophical free market questions, additional government subsidy childcare seems fine. There’s a positive externality of readily available childcare: one adult to many children is more efficient than home care, and parents being able to work generates economic production, taxes, etc. But couldn’t we come up with a subsidy with less market distortion? A specific subsidy to pay for childcare for chi…

I'm a bit bias since I don't pay for childcare but I don't have an issue with childcare being expensive as long as the profit is going directly to the workers. I have a hard time understanding why we don't want talented and ambitious people to raise our children.

> I have a hard time understanding why we don't want talented and ambitious people to raise our children.

I’ve had my kids in some of the best childcare centers in an expensive area so this made me spit up my drink.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#157

Post by westurner » Sat, Oct 07, 2023, 4:20 AM UTC

kulahan wrote: post #37

steven-xu wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universal childcare seems to me significantly less distorting than universal childcare for childcare workers. It’s larger subsidy yes but it corrects for an existing distortion (parents pay full price for childcare to raise children who then end up paying taxes to the state), and it does so in a way that it doesn’t break one specific labor market. We do not do parents who aren’t already childcare workers a favor by s…

But the entire childcare market is run on such tight margins that they all require a model of having a waiting list for children, meaning the market is massively underserved by design. It would seem to me that this is only likely to result in more childcare workers, making it more accessible to all, no?

After how much time would the nonlinear effects of the subsidy be expected to be apparent?

What hypothetical effect would discontinuation of the subsidy have: while it's initially resulting in labor shortage reduction and then after time t?

Are counterfactuals helpful for this problem?

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#158

Post by cbeach » Sat, Oct 07, 2023, 9:12 AM UTC

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #154

anonporridge wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to managed welfare vs UBI. One is creating defined resources and using bureaucracy to divvy them out and force people into buckets they might not be happy with. e.g. here's your government cheese. The other empowers individuals to make their own decisions with cash and lets the free market figure out how best to mine those dollars from the individuals receiving them. I suspect which option a person thinks is…

I oppose UBI for unrelated reasons: giving everyone money (if it is actually a life-changing amount of money) is unaffordable. It's hugely wasteful to give money to wealthy people. Instead, I would prefer a system where people receive payments relative to income, like a reverse tax system. This way, people in higher income brackets pay in (in the form of taxes) and people in lower income brackets get a pay out. This…

That kind of taxation would just reduce upward mobility in the workplace though, wouldn’t it?

I wouldn’t accept a job role with more responsibility if it meant losing my low-income subsidies and being taxed instead.

Society needs workers to accept more responsibilities and progress in their careers otherwise there will be less creation of jobs for those at the entry level.

I’m not saying UBI is the right solution, but it would reduce the “cliffs” where people lose money for progressing in their careers.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#159

Post by bradleyjg » Sat, Oct 07, 2023, 2:06 PM UTC

Racing0461 wrote: post #46

bradleyjg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds lovely At this point in the political universe these are the only measures that get through. We are living in a post policy era of governance. Hopefully the wonks can find some way to get the upper hand again, but I’m not optimistic.

>>> We are living in a post policy era of governance What do you mean by this?

No one in power is trying to design and put in place comprehensive plans to solve any particular problem. It’s all isolated one-offs, mostly involving dumping money instead of regulation, intended to improve a politician’s or party’s political standing.

The ACA and Dodd-Frank, whatever you think of them, were the last counter examples. That was more than a dozen years ago.

Re: Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

#160

Post by balfirevic » Sat, Oct 07, 2023, 2:15 PM UTC

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #154

anonporridge wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to managed welfare vs UBI. One is creating defined resources and using bureaucracy to divvy them out and force people into buckets they might not be happy with. e.g. here's your government cheese. The other empowers individuals to make their own decisions with cash and lets the free market figure out how best to mine those dollars from the individuals receiving them. I suspect which option a person thinks is…

I oppose UBI for unrelated reasons: giving everyone money (if it is actually a life-changing amount of money) is unaffordable. It's hugely wasteful to give money to wealthy people. Instead, I would prefer a system where people receive payments relative to income, like a reverse tax system. This way, people in higher income brackets pay in (in the form of taxes) and people in lower income brackets get a pay out. This…

Those two system are the same - or rather - can be the same depending on how you tweak the parameters.

Wealthy people will pay much more in taxes than what they receive in UBI and you can make this system have the exact same distribution of money as the negative income tax system.