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

331–340 of 540 posts

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

#331

Post by gfiorav »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #68
gfiorav wrote: post #34

This is one of my pet peeves. If you believe in the welfare state concept, you should never refer to anything that’s subsidized as “free.” It’s a recipe for disaster. As a European who was uprooted and settled in the US, I’ve become painfully aware of how little we Europeans comprehend the workings of the economy. I believe this is partly due to the propaganda surrounding the welfare state as “free.” Of course, nothi…

You shouldn’t be downvoted, kind of a lame part of HN lately. I disagree that it’s a recipe for disaster - there are many valid kinds of holistic experiences of how a product is priced / sold, that don’t change the positivist economics of what is happening. As long as childcare is economically positive, I think it is, it doesn’t really matter whatever you call it. And perhaps, it’s free in a way that matters most: re…

Thanks for your comments. I agree--HN has been quite disappointing lately. For a place that's supposed to be full of tech contrarians, it does sound like an answering machine around here sometimes :)

Regarding your retort, I believe it should possible to measure the economic return of every social benefit. I strongly suspect that there are social benefits that more than pay for their own cost.

However, the most effective way to prove this is by measuring it.

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

#332

Post by jonplackett »

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…

The problem is that the word ‘childcare’ can mean anything from a one on one nanny looking after a child to an after school club where it’s just one adult and the kids just do whatever they want with no guidance at all.

You can’t really compare them without a better definition.

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

#333

Post by frumplestlatz »

ryandrake wrote: post #41
diogenescynic wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I don't think the national politics would support that at the moment. I think we have to start somewhere that isn't controversial like extending coverage to kids. I don't think anyone is going to be against covering 8 and 9 year olds... but they might against 18 or 19 year olds. It's a foot in the door persuasion tactic rather than try to get everything all at once.

> I think we have to start somewhere that isn't controversial like extending coverage to kids. I don't think anyone is going to be against covering 8 and 9 year olds... Not sure what gives you this idea. The major political party in power in the US today campaigned in large part on cruelty and removing subsidies and social benefits from people. There are a huge number of people who would bitterly fight against provid…

I’m not cruel because I think society operates best — in terms of human outcomes — if incentives and disincentives are tied to decisions in ways that maximize the likelihood and benefit of personal responsibility.

Parents need to be responsible for their children. The state should only step in if they fail in their responsibility.

How is it folks like yourself can understand these concepts across a myriad of domains, including things like wildlife and their rehabilitation, and the importance of fostering self-sufficiency, but not this?

It’s not kindness to create people dependent on the state, or to advantage businesses that do not pay a living wage by subsidizing their employees.

Hell, look at what we’ve done to the cost of education by creating government-backed loan programs that simply allow universities to charge as much as students can afford to mortgage from their future.

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

#334

Post by insane_dreamer »

beowulfey wrote: post #165
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…

It's not an intractable issue. It's just a matter of economics.

Reduce military spending by 20% and problem solved. Literally.

It's not that we don't have the resources, they're just poorly distributed because we're more interested in subsidizing our bloated defense industry than citizens and their children.

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

#335

Post by frumplestlatz »

LadyCailin wrote: post #184
ryandrake wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we have to start somewhere that isn't controversial like extending coverage to kids. I don't think anyone is going to be against covering 8 and 9 year olds... Not sure what gives you this idea. The major political party in power in the US today campaigned in large part on cruelty and removing subsidies and social benefits from people. There are a huge number of people who would bitterly fight against provid…

[flagged]

No, we just have a very different idea of how best to help people.

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

#336

Post by sib301 »

bilsbie wrote: post #293

Unpopular opinion but leaving your kids with strangers not invested in their development during their most critical years is a terrible idea.

Perhaps if you take them to a dump. The wonderful people at my daughter’s day care are absolutely invested in their development and spend 6 uninterrupted hours per day with them focused exclusively on that. It’s stupid expensive though.

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

#337

Post by trollbridge »

jimt1234 wrote: post #240

I'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…

Because it’s too expensive. Most people want wages.

People who have no children in particular would prefer to be paid wages versus other people getting childcare and them getting less wages.

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

#338

Post by insane_dreamer »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #235
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…

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.

The Economist is a capitalism cheerleader, so no, they would not care for that study.

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

#339

Post by Braxton1980 »

abustamam wrote: post #254
tock wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then do it today so mothers can continue to work and help the economy.

I'd argue that that's the wrong goal. Ideally, families can afford to live off of one salary so that mothers could choose to continue to care for their children if they wanted to do so. Currently, very few families are privileged enough to live off of one salary. Both parents need to work in order to make ends meet. I'm not saying it's an easy problem to solve, or that free childcare isn't a good interim solution. Bu…

The government can set up free child care as it has already set up other similar programs.

How would the government make it so that a single salary can provide for a family? Wouldn't this require massive interference with the economy?

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

#340

Post by mythrwy »

bilsbie wrote: post #293

Unpopular opinion but leaving your kids with strangers not invested in their development during their most critical years is a terrible idea.

That depends on who you are as a parent though. It could be the strangers are lifeline and positive force on the child's development compared to what you are.

A lot of times people assume in these conversation the parents are put together individuals who think about their child's future or even care. And from what I've observed I don't think that is universally the case.

Post reply on HN