Kentucky made child care free for child care workers

Post by Ericson2314 » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 5:17 PM UTC

mbiondi wrote: post #34

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

Universal childcare is low-hanging fruit for America. Unfortunately, there is a vocal section (mostly married men) who want a stay-at-home mom and believe this will, similar to women entering the workforce following the advent of contraception and the civil rights movement, "force" their wives into the workplace.

I've nothing against women in the workplace, but I do think it sucks that in most families both parents are forced to work in order to make ends meet. Universal childcare is the worst of both worlds - you miss out on all those special moments when your children are young and your kids get to be raised by a stranger. Plus the public gets to foot the bill. I guess it works if you don't want those experiences and are ha…

Post by jonny_eh » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 5:18 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

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.

> are the same, just different execution Sure. But the branding matters. The former seems to provoke a vitriolic reaction in some people that, if widespread, could tank it in a way that the identical effect under the second's branding doesn't provoke.

Post by Racing0461 » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 5:19 PM UTC

Avshalom wrote: post #19

epakai wrote: post #15

Texas has an amendment coming up for vote next month to allow municipalities to cut property tax on properties used for child care. Was a pleasant surprise to see real good incentives tied to a change.

That sounds more like a way to let homeschoolers get out of property tax than it does anything that would lower the cost of childcare for workers.

Post by s1artibartfast » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 5:21 PM UTC

deprecative wrote: post #17

isykt wrote: post #8

[flagged]

This right here is why we can't get anything done. Republicans say that the poor will benefit so we can't give them money. The center-right will say we can't do that, the rich might benefit, we can't give them money. So what happens is the rich get all the money. Stop putting means testing garbage on these bills. It only means those who need the assistance on the edge will be denied.

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy » Fri, Oct 06, 2023, 5:21 PM UTC

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…