41–50 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article also mentions a 50% subsidy up to $310,000. The details aren’t spelled out, but subsidies like this often phase out gradually to avoid a cliff at the threshold.
So now you are better off making 310k than 311k, is that much better? It doesn't matter how you read it you still get that effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So now you are better off making 310k than 311k, is that much better? It doesn't matter how you read it you still get that effect.
These subsidies can be implemented in a way where they taper off instead of imposing a hard cliff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So now you are better off making 310k than 311k, is that much better? It doesn't matter how you read it you still get that effect.
No at 310k you get $1 dollar at 311k you get $0. But you know like you have 999 more dollars than before. Assuming Post tax income.
> Officials to offer 50% subsidy up to $310,000
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article also mentions a 50% subsidy up to $310,000. The details aren’t spelled out, but subsidies like this often phase out gradually to avoid a cliff at the threshold.
So now you are better off making 310k than 311k, is that much better? It doesn't matter how you read it you still get that effect.
But my first thought was: Are they gonna shuttle the kids in and out of the city in order to provide said childcare? Or the staff? How would the staff afford housing in SF on a "normal" salary? Where would they build the required buildings when land costs an arm and a leg?
Maybe it's not wise to comment on this while living in Germany and never having been to SF. But my first thought was: Are they gonna shuttle the kids in and out of the city in order to provide said childcare? Or the staff? How would the staff afford housing in SF on a "normal" salary? Where would they build the required buildings when land costs an arm and a leg?
Edit: or are very young and live with their parents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am i missing the joke? ChatGPT tells me 3% of 100 is 3, not 0.18.
.18 is 3% of 6. This might mean something, but I don't know what.
What happens if an unborn baby has rights to go to preschool, but the birthing parent can't?
Is an unborn child a US citizen yet?
Maybe it's not wise to comment on this while living in Germany and never having been to SF. But my first thought was: Are they gonna shuttle the kids in and out of the city in order to provide said childcare? Or the staff? How would the staff afford housing in SF on a "normal" salary? Where would they build the required buildings when land costs an arm and a leg?
The city itself is tiny, this is not the metropolitan area of San Francisco, its just the city limits, so yeah people in suburbs will commute into the city to work there, just like most other people working in San Francisco.
Maybe it's not wise to comment on this while living in Germany and never having been to SF. But my first thought was: Are they gonna shuttle the kids in and out of the city in order to provide said childcare? Or the staff? How would the staff afford housing in SF on a "normal" salary? Where would they build the required buildings when land costs an arm and a leg?
> Are they gonna shuttle the kids in and out of the city in order to provide said childcare? The city itself is tiny, this is not the metropolitan area of San Francisco, its just the city limits, so yeah people in suburbs will commute into the city to work there, just like most other people working in San Francisco.
Income cliffs, even phased, are generally stupid. See Britain's 100k cliff for free childcare. If both parents make 99k, you get it. If one earns 101k and the other earns zero, you don't get it. The workaround (pension stuffing) is widely known and actually means the govt comes off worse than if they'd just given the childcare away. There are all kinds of other perverse effects like people turning down promotions or…