Is Dryden's child care plan what parents want?

[Canuck E Stan]

The Social Minister Ken Dryden doesn't appear to be enthused with his child care plan according to this interview:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePr...084259-sun.html

With statements like:

As for long-term child-care costs: "You really don't know," he said with trademark candour. "In fact, you don't need to know because the future's going to decide it.

"I realize that's not particularly satisfying, but that's how it'll work. That's how systems get created. That's how they evolve."

Is this the best way a government should create a "system", not needing to know where it is going and letting the future decide it's fate? Are we heading down the road to an endless money pit for Child care,just like the Gun Registry?Or should there be a better road for Child Care to follow?

[Bakunin]

The Social Minister Ken Dryden doesn't appear to be enthused with his child care plan according to this interview:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePr...084259-sun.html

With statements like:

As for long-term child-care costs: "You really don't know," he said with trademark candour. "In fact, you don't need to know because the future's going to decide it.

"I realize that's not particularly satisfying, but that's how it'll work. That's how systems get created. That's how they evolve."

Is this the best way a government should create a "system", not needing to know where it is going and letting the future decide it's fate? Are we heading down the road to an endless money pit for Child care,just like the Gun Registry?Or should there be a better road for Child Care to follow?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Want to know what will happen in the futur ? look in quebec, first they will have to put in 3 time more money then they tought just to have a basic childcare system, then they will find out that evryone will want to use it and that the system will have to grow to apease the demand. The government won't have enough money so they will create a waiting list system and there will be a waiting line of 3 years in dense populated area.

then when the system will be proven to be a complete faillure and costing too much, the federal government will drastically cut spending in the system and let the province try to clean up the mess with money they don't have.

[kimmy]

Want to know what will happen in the futur ? look in quebec, first they will have to put in 3 time more money then they tought just to have a basic childcare system, then they will find out that evryone will want to use it and that the system will have to grow to apease the demand. The government won't have enough money so they will create a waiting list system and there will be a waiting line of 3 years in dense populated area.

then when the system will be proven to be a complete faillure and costing too much, the federal government will drastically cut spending in the system and let the province try to clean up the mess with money they don't have.

Yes, that sounds like a government program to me.

I believe that a subsidized program taking advantage of the large number of private daycare industry that already exists (and perhaps providing better certification and standards in the industry) could work without becoming a gigantic boondoggle. I'm not sure of the specifics of Dryden's plan, but if he runs it like he ran the Maple Leafs, I have no doubt it'll suck (Boo-Yah!)

-k

[I miss Reagan]

There's no doubt it'll be another black hole. What I want to know is how people can expect the government to pay for their day care? I understand subsidizing the impoverished, but anything beyond that seems insane. I guess I just will never understand why people in this country feel the government needs to be involved in every facet of our existance. Are we just spoiled?

[Cartman]

If you believe government to be entirely inept and corrupt, then why not agree with Hugo's ideas of the eradication of this dinosaur? At least he is consistent and honest. I have seen nothing to convince me that provincial governments have been any better than our federal governments.

[Cartman]

What I want to know is how people can expect the government to pay for their day care?  I understand subsidizing the impoverished, but anything beyond that seems insane.  I guess I just will never understand why people in this country feel the government needs to be involved in every facet of our existance.  Are we just spoiled?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I actually agree with much of what you have written. But, what about a single parent with two children who pays a disproportionate amount of their income on child care (to the extent that they find it difficult or impossible to make ends meet)?

Child care is quite expensive. What would be your alternative in the above situation?

[I miss Reagan]

If you believe government to be entirely inept and corrupt, then why not agree with Hugo's ideas of the eradication of this dinosaur?  At least he is consistent and honest.  I have seen nothing to convince me that provincial governments have been any better than our federal governments.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Come on, that's not what I'm saying. There are obvious needs for government. Defence, certain infrastructure, justice system etc. My question is where do we define the line? I see no reason why a middle class family needs the tax payers to pay for their day care just so they can have the luxury of an extra income. IMO, the government should be providing incentives for mothers to raise their children.

[Cartman]

Sorry IMR, that particular comment was not directed at you. I was referring to Bakunin who leaves the impression that the federal government is useless at best. If people really feel that way, then they are proposing anarchy or fooling themselves that provincial governments are completely effective and responsive.

I agree with you that too often Canadians readily accept government intervention as the only solution to social issues. I have reservations about this program (though I have not examined it very carefully) as well. In general, I agree with you that it should not be directed at middle class folks, but only the truly needy.

But here seems to be the problem. When Peter Mansbridge interviewed Layton during the last election, one single parent (in Vancouver) claimed that she had a good job, but with two children, her daycare expenses ate up about a 1/3 of her income. She has a middle class job, but child expenses put her into relative poverty. I guess it depends on how "poverty" or "needy" is defined.

[I miss Reagan]

No worrie, my mistake. Where have you been anyway?

But here seems to be the problem. When Peter Mansbridge interviewed Layton during the last election, one single parent (in Vancouver) claimed that she had a good job, but with two children, her daycare expenses ate up about a 1/3 of her income. She has a middle class job, but child expenses put her into relative poverty. I guess it depends on how "poverty" or "needy" is defined.

Ya, it gets complicated. We could also ask questions like does she need to live in Van. where the cost of living is twice that of most other places in Canada, and perhaps we take into account peoples decisions to have children in the first place. Should people have children if the taxpayers are going to have to pay for it? And you're right, how do we define "poverty". When I lived in the States I was troubled when I met some people on welfare yet they owned cell phones. Back then I didn't even have the money to own a cell phone. I saw quite a few abuses by people on welfare, during the course of the work I was doing. Not to say that public assistance is a bad thing, but I guess my point is that everyone has a sad story and if you give people an inch they'll take a mile.

[Hugo]

But, what about a single parent with two children who pays a disproportionate amount of their income on child care (to the extent that they find it difficult or impossible to make ends meet)?

It occurs to me that childcare would not be nearly so expensive as it is had government not gotten involved in the first place. Let's say you have a stay-at-home mum with two children. What's to stop her taking in a few more and making a few bucks, cash-in-hand? I'll tell you: government regulations, stipulations for training and insurance, requirements for on-site registered nurses, etc. All of these restrict daycare operations to formal businesses, who must take all of these requirements as operating costs and build them into prices.

Quite simply, this is the government solution to a mess that government created. As Bakunin rightly says, any government solution creates another mess further down the line, and his suggestions as to what these future messes will be are likely to be very accurate.

The situation is very similar to healthcare. Up until 1930, the price of private healthcare was well within the reach of all. Then government stepped in to fix prices and wages, and healthcare became unaffordable to the masses. Then government proposed to fix its mess by creating public healthcare, and now that's in a mess for which the government will doubtless propose another remedy soon, and the effects of which the next generation will have to clean up.

IMO, the government should be providing incentives for mothers to raise their children.

How would this help?

When Peter Mansbridge interviewed Layton during the last election, one single parent (in Vancouver) claimed that she had a good job, but with two children, her daycare expenses ate up about a 1/3 of her income. She has a middle class job, but child expenses put her into relative poverty.

Currently, that woman will be paying a large slice of income in taxes. Whatever's left, she'll pay sales tax on virtually all of it (people in "relative poverty" don't save much). She'll also pay extra taxes on fuel and running a car (essential for parents), and so forth. If the government wants to help single parents, a good start would be to stop tying one of their hands behind their backs.

[stubblejumper]

I believe that the Day care program is an essential extension of our education system. It should be looked at more as a pre-school, in this day and age children have a lot more knowledge to acquire and therefore , need to start with the basics at an earlier age.

This isn't the babysitter. They learn basic knowledge and more.

Well on the topic of education. It is my belief that this should up there with health care as a right for all citizens and should be fully funded for all !

[Hugo]

It is my belief that this should up there with health care as a right for all citizens and should be fully funded for all !

How can a right depend upon other people and upon a certain level of social and technological development? In pre-industrial times, did people not have the same rights as now, or were these rights just being violated for everyone? What if I decide it is every man's right to have a flying car - until we invent them, are we all victims of systematic rights violations?

If a person were not receiving education and health care, exactly who would be violating his rights? Bearing in mind that the rights to security of the person or to property, when violated, create clear and readily identifiable aggressors.

How much education and health care is it a person's right to receive: elementary school and an occasional visit to the doctor, or ten doctorates, major surgery every month and clinical immortality?

[Bakunin]

I believe that the Day care program is an essential extension of our education system. It should be looked at more as a pre-school, in this day and age children have a lot more knowledge to acquire and therefore , need to start with the basics at an earlier age.

This isn't the babysitter. They learn basic knowledge and more.

Well on the topic of education. It is my belief that this should up there with health care as a right for all citizens and should be fully funded for all !

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

this is exactly what i think too, except for the fully funded things and free right(wich is bad philosophy imo), i think the private sector can get its share too specially if the public system end up in a mediocre system. But one thing is sure, first it will cost alot more than what the federal think it will cost. Second, its clear that the federal will screw this up cause they clearly have no idea of what they are doing, the only thing they are thinking of right now is to get re-elected...

[I miss Reagan]

I believe that the Day care program is an essential extension of our education system. It should be looked at more as a pre-school, in this day and age children have a lot more knowledge to acquire and therefore , need to start with the basics at an earlier age.

This isn't the babysitter. They learn basic knowledge and more.

Well on the topic of education. It is my belief that this should up there with health care as a right for all citizens and should be fully funded for all !

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This honestly scares the hell out of me. This line of thinking that the state should educate children from the time they are born. What's next, the Young Pioneers? The whole reason society is screwed up is because of the tearing apart of the family.

[Bakunin]

This honestly scares the hell out of me. This line of thinking that the state should educate children from the time they are born. What's next, the Young Pioneers? The whole reason society is screwed up is because of the tearing apart of the family.

Lol, I miss Reagan, i would agree if we would have an urss like government but thats not the case, we arent educated by the states, we are educated by educator wich are all different. They all have different opinion but teach us all the same fact.

We must adapt to the new world where parent doesn't have as much time as before with their career. Its sad but its the reality.

[Chimera]

We must adapt to the new world where parent doesn't have as much time as before with their career. Its sad but its the reality.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think this is necessarily true. From what I see in my area, the only reason people are working more is because they are trying to "keep up with the Jones's". Everybody seems to want to drive a brand new car (if not an SUV), have a big expensive house, and fill it with plasma TV's, big stereos, etc, etc. People no longer live within their means.

If you want proof, just look in the parking lot of the local Wal-Mart (or other bargain store) and count how many BMW's, Mercedes, Hummers, et al there are.

I will however admit that the government does not make it easy to save money with all the taxes we must pay.

[I miss Reagan]

Lol, I miss Reagan, i would agree if we would have an urss like government but thats not the case, we arent educated by the states, we are educated by educator wich are all different. They all have different opinion but teach us all the same fact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ya we aren't under complete state education yet, but that seems to be the direction we're heading. I'm not advocating home schooling, but I think parents should certainly play a larger role in raising children than the government. Besides the last thing I want is the government using day cares to spread it's socialist cancer. It's bad enough we have the socialist university profs, and the CBC indoctrinating people.

We must adapt to the new world where parent doesn't have as much time as before with their career. Its sad but its the reality.

Ya I'm with Chimera on this one. Fine adapt all you want, just use your own money to do it. Don't expect me to pay for your day care just because you want the government to subsidize your standard of living.

[Guest eureka]

Where should the line be drawn? Is daycare not just an extension of public education- some might say that is daycare, too.

Then, if only the poor are to receive free daycare, is that not just a class separation? Should not all children be together in their education and socialization.

The argument about keeping up with the Joneses does not fly. How many times does it have to be said that people do need to have two incomes nowadays to achieve the standard of living they had almost thirty years ago? Will the "Right Wing" never let a fact enter their heads instead of always considering one an interference to ideology?

[Dan]

I am employed as a frontline social service worker and have some first hand knowledge regarding the needs of families.

This child care plan will be of great use to some of the families that I work with.

Unfortunately, it will be of absolutely no use to the majority of families with which I work.

And this is the reason that I think that the plan is fundamentally flawed.

It is a wonderful plan with full pomp and circumstance that is useless to a majority of families.

[Cartman]

Hugo, are you sure about the fact that child care became expensive when the government intervened or are you speculating? I am not sure myself, but it interests me enough to find out. I suspect that there may well be other reasons.

It's bad enough we have the socialist university profs, and the CBC indoctrinating people.

Now I have to react to this statement IMR. I would argue that there are many professors in universities that are most definately not socialists (ask Greg if his supervisor is a socialist). I teach numbers so political bias is not really an issue but IMO, professors are able to separate their political beliefs from their teaching. All of my right of centre students feel completely at ease and included in all of my classes.

[I miss Reagan]

How many times does it have to be said that people do need to have two incomes nowadays to achieve the standard of living they had almost thirty years ago?

How many times does it have to be said that repeating something over and over doesn't make it any more true than the first time you said it. And you are out of your mind if you think that we don't have a far higher standard of living than we had 30 years ago. But hey, when all else fails just raise taxes eh? We'll always have that endless pile of money in the tax pool.

[I miss Reagan]

Now I have to react to this statement IMR. I would argue that there are many professors in universities that are most definately not socialists (ask Greg if his supervisor is a socialist). I teach numbers so political bias is not really an issue but IMO, professors are able to separate their political beliefs from their teaching. All of my right of centre students feel completely at ease and included in all of my classes.

Cartman, perhaps we need a different thread for this. Anecdotally of course there are right of center profs. And I believe you when you say you are able to separate your political beliefs from your teaching, but it hasn't been true in my experience in University.

[stubblejumper]

In no way should this program be limited to low income or working parents. It should be looked at as Education.. The kids learn social skills,listening skills, basic math and reading.

Also, in no way should this be a substitute for parenting. Only an additional resource in creating good people. Educated people. Prosperous people.

On the topic of a paternal government. What should a government do for its citizens ? Roads? Job Banks? small business grants? farm support ?

military?

[Cartman]

Here is a problem with the program as I see it. Ideally, the law should not discriminate so should women who already stay at home and care for their children be compensated for doing so? I suspect that many couples with one breadwinner will be close to the poverty line (LICO). I have no problem with my tax dollars going to support people who are struggling, but deciding on who and how much will be very difficult will it not? Does anyone know how the government plans to do so?

[Guest eureka]

IMR! What I think you need is a different thread connecting you to reality. Incomes in Canada began to decline in 1977 and did not reach the real levels again until the late 90's.

For that, we work longer hours. Thus the need for two income families and for daycare.

Those are verifiable facts.