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

71–80 of 540 posts

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

#71

Post by terminalshort »

macintux wrote: post #50
add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our politicians are unpopular because they do nothing to help us, and when they explicitly help us it's framed as lazy poor people looking for handouts. It makes no sense.

Don't forget the "1% of the recipients are fraudulent, therefore the other 99% must spend 10 hours on paperwork and 6 months waiting for the benefits to start, with a 30% chance of rejection" approach.

Have you considered that the reason it's only 1% is because they are strict and have a high rejection rate?

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

#73

Post by tbrownaw »

tock wrote: post #30
SoftTalker wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was done so mothers could work building tanks and airplanes, not out of any concern for the children.

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

If the tax man can't see it, it doesn't exist.

.

Scenario A: Max and Alex are a couple and have kids. Max stays home with them, and Alex has a job with a coworker named Avery.

Scenario B: Max and Alex are a couple and have kids. They both work, and hire Avery to watch the kids.

The same total work gets done by the same group of people in both cases, but the second measures as "better" for "the economy".

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

#74

Post by deburo »

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…

It’s not just redistribution from the very rich. It’s redistribution from every tax payer, and you can bet your tax dollars aren’t used very efficiently.

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

#75

Post by Aarostotle »

Avicebron wrote: post #19
blfr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land value tax is interesting because it encourages/forces more efficient use but you can do a lot more by cutting demand through limiting immigration and financialization opportunities.

I'm not sure why people don't immediately get serfdom vibes whenever they mention a land tax.

It’s the same reason people don’t get serfdom vibes when a government proposes to take over childcare.

Governments buying goods for people with tax money turns them into dependents, sometimes permanently. It’s easy to overlook that.

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

#76

Post by terminalshort »

sudosteph wrote: post #25

Can't read the whole article, but am curious about how it will impact unlicensed childcare operations. I imagine that the number of parents using these is much higher than many people realize. Will be interesting to see how many parents end up using the state program.

Until very recently in human history 100% of childcare operations were unlicensed, and this was better in every way than a government bureaucracy run system.

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

#77

Post by darknavi »

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…

What's the Matter with Kansas? (2004) by Thomas Frank explores some of this, but centered around Kansas. Pretty interesting (and frustrating) stuff.

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

#78

Post by rectang »

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…

I agree with the concept of not labeling things which are subsidized as "free", while still considering the price worth it. Similarly, I think the framing of negative rights vs entitlements makes sense, while still believing that certain entitlements are worthwhile.

Unfortunately, I have found that such framings are mostly associated with a set of beliefs which I feel profoundly at odds with (e.g. unlimited wealth inequality is fine). So I find myself aligned with the "health care is a human right" crowd despite my discomfort with the ideological underpinnings.

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

#79

Post by analog31 »

seneca wrote: post #45
analog31 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a tavern puts out a sign saying "free beer," nobody needs to point out that someone is paying for the beer. There's no confusion about this.

A tavern isn't funded by taxes. They're giving away their own money. A government doesn't have its own money, it is giving away tax payer money.

An economy is not a zero sum game.

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

#80

Post by godelski »

diogenescynic wrote: post #5

Medicare should cover children. Then we'd be covering children and the elderly. I think that seems fair--children deserve healthcare (just like education) as a fundamental right. It shouldn't be dependent on their parents.

It baffles me that it's so hard to argue for care for children. The response is always "but it's the parents' responsibility". Which, okay, fair, BUT if the parent is failing their responsibility (which can happen for many reasons, many of which don't need maliciousness nor incompetence), then what? We let the child die? We let the child starve? That's what I don't get. A child doesn't have autonomy, so it shouldn't even be a question of helping them out.

We can argue about what to do with the parents but in the mean time we're going to let children suffer? That's lunacy. I don't even have children and I'll gladly pay taxes to prevent child suffering. How is anyone against that?

Post reply on HN