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

281–290 of 540 posts

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

#281

Post by watwut »

Spivak wrote: post #242
hammock wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. If we could fund universal child care so that the ratio of caregiver to child was more like 1 to 2 or 1 to 5 or even 1 to 8 in extreme cases, then the lack of attentiveness would not be a problem. Wait a minute… that sounds like…

Okay but you do understand that what you're suggesting costs the full salary a woman (because of course it would never be men asked give up their careers) could earn for the family and the economic gains that come with it. Back of the napkin calculation is three trillion dollars of value lost annually . And that's before the knock-on effects of such a massive recession. Household income will drop by 30-40% across the…

I mean, that is an advantage to people who push for that. That way the woman is made completely dependent on man and cant leave no matter how bad the situation gets. If you want men to be head of households then lack of female employment is an advantage.

Of course men to get simultaneously resentful over having to work while women done and spend their money each time they buy something, are not super thankful all of the time cause people are not, but that is not concern to those people either.

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

#282

Post by tastyface »

nathanaldensr wrote: post #271
Spivak wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but you do understand that what you're suggesting costs the full salary a woman (because of course it would never be men asked give up their careers) could earn for the family and the economic gains that come with it. Back of the napkin calculation is three trillion dollars of value lost annually . And that's before the knock-on effects of such a massive recession. Household income will drop by 30-40% across the…

[flagged]

What the fuck, dude?

Bud, "your" people are "getting replaced" because they’re not fucking enough. Pounding your chest about "low-IQ" immigrants and masculinity won't help: they still won't fuck until they feel they can afford the lifestyle they want, regardless of who you feel the "burden of proof" is on. Enjoy seeing -- gasp!! -- a whole lot more brown faces with scary names in the future. (As always, the kids will be alright, regardless of whatever scornful glances they might catch from insecure adult "men".)

Want to raise the next generation of humans in a healthy, humanistic way? Then you go fucking do it, Mr. Big Man. Otherwise, let us do the sensible thing of having universal child care and go back to your racist rat hole.

Someday your woke kids will read your comment and will be mortified.

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

#283

Post by watwut »

nathanaldensr wrote: post #271
Spivak wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but you do understand that what you're suggesting costs the full salary a woman (because of course it would never be men asked give up their careers) could earn for the family and the economic gains that come with it. Back of the napkin calculation is three trillion dollars of value lost annually . And that's before the knock-on effects of such a massive recession. Household income will drop by 30-40% across the…

[flagged]

> We need fathers to protect and provide.

Protect from what? Themselves and other men? Why do they have to provide while women are being made helpless and dependent?

> Things worked this way for thousands upon thousands of years and led to our species being amazingly resilient

It led to high domestic violence against women. Even normalized one where being the wife was considered just being a man. These are very much correlated with lack of opportunities for women to get earn and live independently. Too many men were using the "protection" as an excuse for being the primary danger in their women's lives.

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

#284

Post by kelseyfrog »

nathanaldensr wrote: post #271
Spivak wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but you do understand that what you're suggesting costs the full salary a woman (because of course it would never be men asked give up their careers) could earn for the family and the economic gains that come with it. Back of the napkin calculation is three trillion dollars of value lost annually . And that's before the knock-on effects of such a massive recession. Household income will drop by 30-40% across the…

[flagged]

> The burden of proof is on feminists to prove why things they believe and optimize for are necessary and good, not the other way around.

Simple question, but what evidence would change your mind?

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

#285

Post by nineplay »

czhu12 wrote: post #142
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…

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…

FTA

> Think of the Perry and Quebec experiments—two of the most widely cited in the early-education literature—as poles at either end of a spectrum

Even The Economist acknowledges that its a single study in a single province which runs contradictory to other studies. That they turn that into headline article says more about The Economist and readers of The Economist than it does about universal child care.

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

#286

Post by g9yuayon »

lordnacho wrote: post #246
g9yuayon wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so we have been unwilling to invest in our own children. The school districts like SFUSD are actually sabotaging the growth of our kids in the name of equity. They're committed to ideas from people like Jo Boaler, and they tried very hard to dumb down the curriculum. The real tragedy is that kids from wealthy families will just get other means of education to make up the difference. It's the kids who desperately ne…

I looked up this lady on Wikipedia, but I couldn't find any obvious problems. It says she's a math educator with degrees from known universities and lots of published research?

https://stanfordreview.org/jo-boaler-and-the-woke-math-death..., and wikipedia on Math Wars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_wars

Personally, I find Boaler's advocacy extreme. Her famous quote: "Every student is capable of understanding every theorem in mathematics – and beyond – the mathematics curriculum. They just need the opportunity to struggle with rich tasks and see mathematics as a conceptual, creative subject.” This sounds inspiring, but in practice she advocated the policy of truly dumbing down math curriculums and text books. To say the least, shouldn't she at least demonstrate that she could understand any theorem? But instead, she advocated that SFUSD eliminate algebra from 8th Grade . Another example was that the curriculum that she advocated, College Preparatory Mathematics, was so boring and trivial. She also said something along the line "Traditional mathematics teaching is repetitive and uninspiring. We give students 30 similar problems to do over and over again, and it bores them and turns them off math for life.” What's funny is that the alternatives that Boaler prescribed were quite uninspiring and low level: https://www.youcubed.org/tasks/. All I can derive from her policies and complaints is that she couldn't do math. Why people would listen to someone who sucked at math about math education is beyond me.

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

#287

Post by AnthonyMouse »

abustamam wrote: post #247
Rebelgecko wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

That either means that childcare is too expensive or teachers don't get paid enough (probably both tbh) I feel like a lot of folks don't actually do this math, and don't realize that they're essentially just working to pay someone else to watch their kid.

> That either means that childcare is too expensive or teachers don't get paid enough (probably both tbh)

It's not necessarily either one. If you do it yourself, you reuse the existing home instead of needing a separate building with its own rent, maintenance and security, the children and the adult watching them wake up in the same place instead of both having to commute to the childcare building, you have no administrative costs in terms of hiring, HR, accounting, background checks, etc. By the time you add up all the additional costs, you can easily end up underwater against doing it yourself even if each adult in the central facility is watching more kids -- and that itself is a cost because then each kid gets less attention.

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

#288

Post by throwaway6734 »

It's a shame that there's not the option of providing parents with the choice of free child care or some kind of cash subsidy.

A bit tangential, but the overall problem is that cost of having children is privatized while the benefit is socialized. I'd love to see age and number of children progressively factored into the income tax bracket people pay. Something like a 60-80% tax rate for all income >150k for those >40 without children so those that benefit the most from future generations being born are helping to shoulder the cost

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

#289

Post by [deleted] »

Spivak wrote: post #242
hammock wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. If we could fund universal child care so that the ratio of caregiver to child was more like 1 to 2 or 1 to 5 or even 1 to 8 in extreme cases, then the lack of attentiveness would not be a problem. Wait a minute… that sounds like…

Okay but you do understand that what you're suggesting costs the full salary a woman (because of course it would never be men asked give up their careers) could earn for the family and the economic gains that come with it. Back of the napkin calculation is three trillion dollars of value lost annually . And that's before the knock-on effects of such a massive recession. Household income will drop by 30-40% across the…

[deleted]

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

#290

Post by worik »

ninalanyon wrote: post #261
czhu12 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In Norway every child has a right to a barnehage place (kindergarten). It's not free unless you are poor but it is very affordable at a maximum of about 3 000 NOK per month, about 300 USD, for five full days a week. Children in barnehage learn to be social and cooperative, resilient and adaptable. They play outside in all weathers, learn to put on and take off their outer clothes, to set tables, help each other and t…

> So what exactly is New Mexico proposing to provide and what did Quebec provide?

I do not know specifically. But I surmise, culture.

The things we value, culturally, make themselves apparent

Post reply on HN