New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care • Hacker News Board

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#461

Post by throawayonthe » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:37 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #336

mothballed wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would make sense IMO to provide an equal value waiver to those who take care of their kid rather than send them to childcare. Stay at home moms do not provide a less valuable service than childcare providers. This policy appears to disincentives children staying with their mother even when it is preferred.

I just don't understand this mentality. My wife is a stay-at-home mom. We are lucky that we can afford to do this. Most of our kid's friends have both parents working and they pay for child care. If suddenly they were able to have that childcare paid for, that would be wonderful! It doesn't affect our situation at all. Why would we oppose it? I don't need to have my own "waiver" payment in order for me to be in favor…

because your wife (and in turn your household yes) deserves to be compensated for the socially valuable labour first of all?

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#462

Post by Pxtl » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:38 PM UTC

ian-g wrote: post #119

itake wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess Youre not a fan of UBI?

That feels like an entirely separate policy. This one is about making sure small children have care, not whether or not people deserve a minimum guaranteed income

This is basically UBI for parenting, so it's hard to see it as "entirely separate".

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#463

Post by KetoManx64 » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:38 PM UTC

doctorwho42 wrote: post #441

KetoManx64 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't work that way. The US Welfare programs have created multi generational families that have never worked and do not have any parents or grandparents that have ever worked a real job because if anyone did they would risk losing $100k's worth of free benefits to work a minimum wage job that would only pay them $30k. It has created a permanant underclass of people with no job skills that are wholly dependant on…

I think you are using a whataboutism argument. In this case the childcare benefit will be universal, as in it is NOT means tested like your example.

It may not be means tested, but it will be utilized primarily by families on welfare, and lower income families and in the long term by middle class families who become lower income due to government subsidized programs like these forcing them to pay more for their daily necessities through an increased tax burden.

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#464

Post by onlypassingthru » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:40 PM UTC

mothballed wrote: post #16

dzink wrote: post #12

This is fantastic! I hope they succeed and there is no abuse or other issues, because it will show how much an economy can grow when women are allowed to work to their full potential. Families who were previously in poverty because the mom would struggle to pay for childcare to work can now have assurance kids are ok while the mom can pursue jobs, start her own small business (huge chunk of businesses are small busin…

Would make sense IMO to provide an equal value waiver to those who take care of their kid rather than send them to childcare. Stay at home moms do not provide a less valuable service than childcare providers. This policy appears to disincentives children staying with their mother even when it is preferred.

Your taxes pay for the public service whether you use it or not. Take a look at your property tax statement and I bet you can find all sorts of things you may or may not use: parks fees, library fees, health/hospital fees, schools, etc. Should everyone who reads but doesn't use the public library get a book voucher? I'm a stay-at-home-reader, why shouldn't I get the government to subsidize my reading?

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#465

Post by bialpio » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:40 PM UTC

shafyy wrote: post #270

dzink wrote: post #12

This is fantastic! I hope they succeed and there is no abuse or other issues, because it will show how much an economy can grow when women are allowed to work to their full potential. Families who were previously in poverty because the mom would struggle to pay for childcare to work can now have assurance kids are ok while the mom can pursue jobs, start her own small business (huge chunk of businesses are small busin…

> I hope they succeed and there is no abuse or other issues, because it will show how much an economy can grow I know you are meaning well, but while the economy growing can be a nice side effect of this (and probably is), I always find it a bit sad when economic profit is used as a reason to justify to create a more fair and equal society. It's similar with those studies showing hiring a diverse workforce is actuall…

> I know you are meaning well, but while the economy growing can be a nice side effect of this (and probably is), I always find it a bit sad when economic profit is used as a reason to justify to create a more fair and equal society.

Unfortunately, this is how some people think, so phrasing things in this manner is a way to win them over ("paying a bit more in taxes is actually going to benefit you").

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#466

Post by lotsofpulp » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #459

lotsofpulp wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switzerland has not achieved a replacement rate TFR since 1970. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/che/swi... Any sustainable policy would obviously result in a TFR of at least the replacement rate.

I have no idea what TFR has to do with anything here. So Swiss people aren't having kids like they were before, that is not relevant to education outcomes, maybe they are just really good in teaching sex education.

A sub replacement rate TFR leads to extinction, not to mention wreaks havoc on government policies that have long been dependent on growth.

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#467

Post by mothballed » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:41 PM UTC

lillecarl wrote: post #451

mothballed wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't subsidize the rich, yet you subsidize rich child care corporations (or high-level bureaucrats in the event it is public) at the expense of not subsidizing stay at home moms. You don't want people paid for taking care of their children, but it's OK if other people are paid for taking care of their chidlren. None of this makes sense. Especially not this false dichotomy that either you send your kids to daycar…

We live in different societies, yours is extremely on the individualism spectrum and ours is on the "common good" spectrum. We don't subsidize the childcare corporations here, we do what's best for society.

I might be wrong, but I believe in Sweden salaries are able to be publicly found. Find some high level people in the public or private childcares in your nation who are beneficiaries of these subsidies and then tell me how rich they are compared to the average stay at home mom.

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#468

Post by jrflowers » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:42 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #336

mothballed wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would make sense IMO to provide an equal value waiver to those who take care of their kid rather than send them to childcare. Stay at home moms do not provide a less valuable service than childcare providers. This policy appears to disincentives children staying with their mother even when it is preferred.

I just don't understand this mentality. My wife is a stay-at-home mom. We are lucky that we can afford to do this. Most of our kid's friends have both parents working and they pay for child care. If suddenly they were able to have that childcare paid for, that would be wonderful! It doesn't affect our situation at all. Why would we oppose it? I don't need to have my own "waiver" payment in order for me to be in favor…

> I just don't understand this mentality.

It is bad faith reasoning. If you imagine a person that does not want women to participate in the workforce but wants to express that in a way that doesn’t sound repugnant, it is pretty easy to see how someone would come up with that.

The way you can tell that it’s bad faith is by looking at the context that “pay women to stay out of the workforce” gets brought up. In this case it is framed as an alternative to providing childcare, but those two ideas have nothing to do with each other. As a society we could do both. The “pay women to stay out of the workforce” or “pay for childcare” dichotomy is completely made up, and folks that engage in that particular type of make-believe are either profoundly intellectually lazy or being intentionally disingenuous.

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#469

Post by slg » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:43 PM UTC

vlovich123 wrote: post #393

ryandrake wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't understand this mentality. My wife is a stay-at-home mom. We are lucky that we can afford to do this. Most of our kid's friends have both parents working and they pay for child care. If suddenly they were able to have that childcare paid for, that would be wonderful! It doesn't affect our situation at all. Why would we oppose it? I don't need to have my own "waiver" payment in order for me to be in favor…

There's two things I think you've overlooked. One thing is that politically it's easier for benefits to remain sticky if everyone benefits from it vs a subpopulation. That's why universal income has stronger support than welfare benefits. Additionally, when you don't have means testing, the bureaucracy is a lot more straightforward and politicians can't mess with it by effectively cutting the program by increasing th…

> One thing is that politically it's easier for benefits to remain sticky if everyone benefits from it vs a subpopulation. That's why universal income has stronger support than welfare benefits.

It is funny to say this in this specific conversation. The exact logic you are using to support rebates for stay at home parents applies to childless people. So why are you drawing the line exactly where you are drawing it and why is that a better place than where this policy is currently drawing it?

Re: New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care

#470

Post by mattmaroon » Tue, Sep 09, 2025, 5:43 PM UTC

mothballed wrote: post #16

dzink wrote: post #12

This is fantastic! I hope they succeed and there is no abuse or other issues, because it will show how much an economy can grow when women are allowed to work to their full potential. Families who were previously in poverty because the mom would struggle to pay for childcare to work can now have assurance kids are ok while the mom can pursue jobs, start her own small business (huge chunk of businesses are small busin…

Would make sense IMO to provide an equal value waiver to those who take care of their kid rather than send them to childcare. Stay at home moms do not provide a less valuable service than childcare providers. This policy appears to disincentives children staying with their mother even when it is preferred.

I don’t get a voucher for not receiving medicaid or food stamps. Fairness is a concept meant to tame unruly preschoolers, let’s just solve problems.