All for it, but free birth control should also be provided.
We do also have reproductive care written into law.
In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
231–240 of 540 posts
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
4.5? At a US daycare those kids will be in a group of 20-40, with one or two adults supervising.
Varies by state and age? My very red state does not allow a group of 40, full stop. The largest group allowed is for 3-year-olds, with a 1:15 adult:child ratio. For younger children, the ratios and group sizes are smaller. I was off on the 4-5 though. Ratio for Anyway, this is all to the point that it's nothing like the 1-2 in in-home care. There's a reason nannies are associated with richer people.
Given the cost of out of home childcare, three kids more than pays for a nanny. Even two can.
Not exactly a “rich” thing, just a matter of “scale” (in YC terms).
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#233My current theory is that we've basically gotten addicted to importing the world's smartest kids so we have been unwilling to invest in our own children.
What makes you say that when New Mexico is now offering free childcare?
Free childcare is an investment in working parents, not the children.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Sure, that is a problem. Ironically the best solution from an overall expense management standpoint is to drive economies of scale by building more and retiring older units on an accelerated schedule to cut maintenance costs. Keep production lines running continuously instead of periodically starting and stopping. The F-35A, while badly flawed in certain ways, is at least relatively affordable due to high production volumes.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#235US 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…
For what its worth, the Economist recently wrote about how universal child care can harm children, citing a study from Quebec. > The trio published their first study in 2005, and the results were damning. Shifting to universal child care appeared to lead to a rise in aggression, anxiety and hyperactivity among Quebecer children, as well as a fall in motor and social skills. The effects were large: anxiety rates doubl…
You'd think the Economist would care more about this study: https://childcarecanada.org/documents/child-care-news/11/06/...
Showing that subsidized day care pays for itself.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#236Given the negative world wide trend with birthrates, this should be a priority with every developed country even if it eventually comes at the expense of elderly socialized healthcare.
We would be even better off subsidizing parents staying home with their own children. Unfortunately most subsidies have proven ineffective at nudging up birth rates.
In an emotional development sort of way: maybe. Subsidized childcare however provides two jobs to the economy for the price of one and every single person worried about birth rates is either a white supremacist or the sort of emotionless economist that 2:1 is appealing to.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any UBI system that provided even poverty level wages would require significant tax increases to pay for it Or cutting other things to pay for it, in addition to smaller tax increases. And the costs go down once it's bootstrapped long enough to obtain the long-term economic benefits that grow the economy (which will take a while to materialize). Honestly, my biggest concern with it is that people will (rightfully)…
> And the costs go down once it's bootstrapped long enough to obtain the long-term economic benefits that grow the economy (which will take a while to materialize). This is hypothetical, isn't it?
Depends what you mean.
We have a decent idea of the velocity of money of households at different income levels on the basis of how likely people are to spend all their money vs. holding on to them in ways that may or may not be as effective at stimulating economic activity.
In that sense it is not particularly hypothetical.
In terms of whether people will be more likely to e.g. start a business, that part is a lot more hypothetical. There have been some trials where there seems to have been some effect, but others where it's not clear.
That effect seems very much hypothetical. But that was not part of the classical argument for UBI, and I don't think it's a good idea to use it as an argument for UBI.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If someone has the means to comfortably raise a child without being in poverty do they still need free childcare then?
Often programs like this are subsidized based on income such that if they can afford it, it is subsidized less, or you do not qualify past a certain income. That is one method of managing the program's costs, while still benefitting those who are most heavily affected. This program doesn't appear to do that, but many do.
I am not sure what point you are trying to make though.
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Not to build, but to build and maintain. We never budget for maintenance (we as in companies and governments).
Re: In a U.S. First, New Mexico Opens Doors to Free Child Care for All
#240I've always wondered why on-site child care generally isn't offered as a perk through employment. Many large companies, like the F500 I work for, offer various on-site perks, like subsidized cafeterias, exercise facilities, garden, meditation room, etc., but never the thing that would help (parents) the most: an on-site child care center. My hunch is it comes down to two major obstacles: (1) the liability risk is too high; one accident can result in a major lawsuit to the company, and (2) the cost of the distractions; parents will never get any work done if their kid close by.
I'm not even a parent, but I see the struggle parents go through wrt child care.