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

In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 540 posts

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#191

Post by swivelmaster »

SoftTalker wrote: post #163
runako wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analysis is incomplete for a couple of reasons: 1. any universal childcare scheme will involve groups larger than the median at-home familial group. Avery is watching ~1-2 kids, but if those kids are at creche, they are in a group of (say) ~4-5. 2. In much of the country, a) is financially out of reach for many couples due to cost of living generally being based around two-income households.

4.5? At a US daycare those kids will be in a group of 20-40, with one or two adults supervising.

In California, at least, those numbers wouldn't be acceptable.

My daughter's at an in-home daycare with IIRC five or six other kids. There are two adults there full-time, sometimes three.

Two adults supervising 20-40 daycare-aged kids is simply not feasible.

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#192

Post by sa46 »

SoftTalker wrote: post #163
runako wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analysis is incomplete for a couple of reasons: 1. any universal childcare scheme will involve groups larger than the median at-home familial group. Avery is watching ~1-2 kids, but if those kids are at creche, they are in a group of (say) ~4-5. 2. In much of the country, a) is financially out of reach for many couples due to cost of living generally being based around two-income households.

4.5? At a US daycare those kids will be in a group of 20-40, with one or two adults supervising.

Depends on the state and child age. California is on the stricter end of legally mandated ratios:

0-18 months: 1:3

18 months to 3 years: 1:4

3-5 years: 1:5

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#194

Post by dafelst »

hammock wrote: post #159
Workaccount2 wrote: post #70

All for it, but free birth control should also be provided.

Why? Do we have too many children?

In some places (esp those with low access to birth control and sub-par sexual health education), there are too many unplanned children being born to people who do not have the means to comfortably raise a child without being in poverty.

Free/low-cost birth control and better sex ed are proven to reduce these instances substantially.

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#195

Post by softwaredoug »

ryandrake wrote: post #15
softwaredoug wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US will kick into gear at certain emergency times (WW2, Covid, etc) but not so great outside of then.

I don't see how the US's feeble and lackluster response to COVID counted as "kicking into gear".

We put massive public funding into vaccine. We also seemed to fund healthcare a great deal (now being pulled back as ACA subsidies expire). Covid was the basis for a lot of short term emergency measures in early Biden, even late Trump I, admins.

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#196

Post by codazoda »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #146
tbrownaw wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the tax man can't see it, it doesn't exist. . Scenario A: Max and Alex are a couple and have kids. Max stays home with them, and Alex has a job with a coworker named Avery. Scenario B: Max and Alex are a couple and have kids. They both work, and hire Avery to watch the kids. The same total work gets done by the same group of people in both cases, but the second measures as "better" for "the economy".

The financials of childcare don't really make sense to me. YMMV depending on your situation, but childcare costs are basically equivalent to my wife's teacher salary. And because of our tax bracket, it'd actually be CHEAPER for her to quit her job and take care of 2 kids full time, vs getting paid teach like 20 kids. There's tradeoffs in terms of career progression, but it seems broken that there's a decent financial…

My kids were young 25 years ago but the same was true for us then.

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#197

Post by WalterBright »

yndoendo wrote: post #6

US actually provided child care to mothers employed during WWII. [0] Richard Nixon vetoed the bill that would have expanded it out to all families. [1] Funny how we keep forgetting the past and reject what benefited us as a whole with a moved to pure individualism built around selfishness. AKA The rich keep getting richer. [0] https://www.wwiimemorialfriends.org/blog/the-lanham-act-and-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.or…

> a moved to pure individualism built around selfishness

The US was founded on individual rights and freedoms, not community sacrifice. Meanwhile, during the 1800s, scores of millions of people moved up from poverty into the middle class and beyond.

(Immigrants to the US arrived with nothing more than a suitcase.)

> Funny how we keep forgetting the past and reject what benefited us as a whole

Oh the irony!

Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All

#200

Post by WalterBright »

nradov wrote: post #183
TylerE wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? We don’t need tanks and planes. We have plenty.

We've strayed pretty far from the original topic here, but the reality is that the US military is literally running out of working aircraft because they're so old . The average age of USAF aircraft is now about 28 years. The fleet was allowed to decay and not substantially recapitalized during the GWOT. Many of the fighters in the combat coded inventory aren't even allowed to hit their original 9G maneuvering limit a…

The problem is that fighter aircraft have gotten too expensive to afford to build, even for a nation.
Post reply on HN