Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

governor.state.nm.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 695 posts

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

#581

Post by chlodwig »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #557
chlodwig wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because it will show how much an economy can grow when women are allowed to work to their full potential. Disagree. Everyone needs to realize that having two parents who both have "greedy jobs" is a path to misery. Giving out childcare does not change the situation. One parent will always need to step back from their career or there will be misery, I've seen too many cases. Even if both parents are comfortable puttin…

1 greedy job + 1 non-greedy job + daycare is surely better for the economy than 1 greedy job + no job, isn't it? If the economy is what you're trying to optimize for.

I don't want to optimize for the economy... but if I did ...

Instead of having the second parents work the non-greedy job painting a house or what-not, and then third-parties working in the child care industry ... just have the second parent take care of their own children and the third-parties painting the houses or what not. Your equation leaves out that the parent taking care of their own kid frees up the workers from the daycare industry to do something else. So their is no net loss in output. It only is a net loss if daycare is so much more efficient at taking care of kids that one day-care worker can free up multiple parents to work non-greedy jobs, but when you look at the all-in costs of daycare including administration and facilities and floaters that is not really the case.

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

#582

Post by ksenzee »

WalterBright wrote: post #503
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…

My mom was a full time mom and I wouldn't trade that for anything.

That’s great, but not every mom is your mom. You just lucked out. This is like saying “my dad was a doctor and we lived very well and I wouldn’t trade that for anything.” Some dads aren’t cut out to be highly paid professionals. Some moms aren’t cut out to be good stay-at-home parents.

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

#583

Post by ksenzee »

KetoManx64 wrote: post #463
doctorwho42 wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You have clearly not shopped for childcare on the open market. Highly paid professionals still struggle to get childcare. Putting more resources into the system will be a net positive for all parents who need childcare.

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

#584

Post by bryanlarsen »

chlodwig wrote: post #581
bryanlarsen wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 greedy job + 1 non-greedy job + daycare is surely better for the economy than 1 greedy job + no job, isn't it? If the economy is what you're trying to optimize for.

I don't want to optimize for the economy... but if I did ... Instead of having the second parents work the non-greedy job painting a house or what-not, and then third-parties working in the child care industry ... just have the second parent take care of their own children and the third-parties painting the houses or what not. Your equation leaves out that the parent taking care of their own kid frees up the workers…

That only works if you have at least 5 kids. Otherwise the ratio of kids to caregivers is higher at the daycare than with a stay at home parent.

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

#585

Post by colechristensen »

Loudergood wrote: post #150
colechristensen wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with more people entering the workforce is that the people never end up better off. Prices just go up and people end up working more for the same result. Changing the definition of full-time hours to 30/week would do far more for families and children than giving free childcare so mothers can work more. Making mortgages with a > 20 year term illegal, putting limits on the total principal allowed to loan a…

That last part is just going to make more housing cheaper for landlords and force more people into renting.

No I think there should be extreme limits on anybody owning a single family home that they don't live in. With enormous tax penalties for those who do.

Don't let people get 30 year mortgages. Don't let people own houses they don't live in.

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

#586

Post by ndriscoll »

gopher_space wrote: post #578
ndriscoll wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a crab bucket mentality. Subsidizing one group that competes in the same markets (e.g. only dual income families, who compete with single income families for housing in desirable areas to raise kids) actually increases costs for the unsubsidized group. It doesn't just make them relatively worse off, but absolutely worse off. It shifts the margin of who can afford a single family lifestyle, all else equal. Si…

The number of people in this thread workshopping their libertarian edge cases on an item of immediate importance strongly suggests the crab bucket. The comments don't reflect an understanding of the situation people are in or a grasp of the dynamics that led to it.

How is advocating for a larger unconditional child credit libertarian? As someone else in the thread pointed out, it's effectively UBI for children. It's literally advocating for more people to receive government subsidies. It's not even a crazy proposal since we already have a refundable child tax credit, so it's a matter of making it bigger.

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

#587

Post by chlodwig »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #584
chlodwig wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to optimize for the economy... but if I did ... Instead of having the second parents work the non-greedy job painting a house or what-not, and then third-parties working in the child care industry ... just have the second parent take care of their own children and the third-parties painting the houses or what not. Your equation leaves out that the parent taking care of their own kid frees up the workers…

That only works if you have at least 5 kids. Otherwise the ratio of kids to caregivers is higher at the daycare than with a stay at home parent.

No, because you have to count all the employment going into running and supplying the daycare, which includes facilities, equipment, administration, extra staff, etc. You have to look at the all-in cost.

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

#588

Post by [deleted] »

ndriscoll wrote: post #586
gopher_space wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of people in this thread workshopping their libertarian edge cases on an item of immediate importance strongly suggests the crab bucket. The comments don't reflect an understanding of the situation people are in or a grasp of the dynamics that led to it.

How is advocating for a larger unconditional child credit libertarian? As someone else in the thread pointed out, it's effectively UBI for children. It's literally advocating for more people to receive government subsidies. It's not even a crazy proposal since we already have a refundable child tax credit , so it's a matter of making it bigger.

[deleted]

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

#589

Post by giantg2 »

ch4s3 wrote: post #576
giantg2 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to understand what value your initial comment holds. The grandparents of that comment was talking about financial feasibility of the program in the context of a proposed waiver. This necessarily implies that on-topic responses to that should be weighing financial feasibility of the program with and without the waiver. Your most recent comment seems to just be clarifying that your initial comment is just the sa…

The idea of extending the program to pay people who aren't using the benefit directly sounds nice in theory but would cost way more and incentivizes people to not work. This necessarily makes the broader version of the program even more expensive than it appears at first. A working parent using a daycare voucher necessarily pays taxes back into the system and so does the day care. This offsets the cost a little. Givi…

"A working parent using a daycare voucher necessarily pays taxes back into the system and so does the day care."

This assumes the value of the parent working is greater than the value generated by the alternative consumer spending.

"and incentivizes people to not work"

This would only incentivize low income individuals to not work, which could actually be beneficial as it could drive a living wage increase in that labor segment if employers had to compete against the benefit.

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

#590

Post by bryanlarsen »

chlodwig wrote: post #587
bryanlarsen wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works if you have at least 5 kids. Otherwise the ratio of kids to caregivers is higher at the daycare than with a stay at home parent.

No, because you have to count all the employment going into running and supplying the daycare, which includes facilities, equipment, administration, extra staff, etc. You have to look at the all-in cost.

I've never seen a daycare with more than 5% of staff doing admin. Either it's a small daycare with a handful of workers and everybody doing care, or it's a large one with one person doing admin.
Post reply on HN