Child Care Plan

[Drea]

You hate conservative types that think you should have someone working and someone raising the kids. In today's world, more women are educated than men, so I think you might see more stay at home dads as the woman can make more cash.

Women are still making -- what was it -- 72% of what their male counterparts make. So this isn't going to happen for a generation or two.

You've blamed the conservatives for housing prices in Vancouver,

I should have clarified and said: Conservatives are making it harder for women to work. I should have said BY THE WAY, it takes $129,000 income to buy a house. My bad, sorry for not clarifying.

I for one, NEED a detached home.

and you've blamed them for creating some kind of husband's right to have sex without birth control. You just hate conservatives, admit it. You'd rather have the government control every aspect of everything you do, regulate those housing prices, build warehouses to store your kids for the day, ect. ect.

How ridiculous.

I don't want gov't to control everything. I have no hate on for conservatives. Some of the best conversations I've had are with conservatives. (Actually they are more than likely just centrists who lean a bit to the right LOL)

The birth control thing? Well this comment says to me: "I am a MAN and you WILL have sex with me, I don't care if you get pregnant, I don't care what happens, I just want to get my rocks off"

The kids were not exactly planned, but then I am an Alberta conservative....so....could you blame her?

Perhaps that's not what he meant, but that's certainly how it came across.

Hydraboss, my apologies, you are correct, I should have asked why she still works nights.

By law, a 9 or 10 year old can stay home (after school for a couple of hours) by themselves. How do I know? I looked into it when my son was 10 and didn't want to go to after school care anymore.

Sparhawk said:

universal daycare service because it simply encourages people to make bad choices that end up costing the tax payer a lot of money. If anything, the gov't t should provide more incentives to encourage people to stay at home to take care of their own kids. Subsidized daycare, when it is available should be restricted to the truely working poor (i.e. single parent households with low income).

I don't think that daycare availability will encourage anyone to make bad choices (a bad choice to you, may be a good choice to someone else, btw). The entire issue revolves around the fact that there are not enough daycare spaces. Money is not the issue. There is already daycare money available for low income families, as you pointed out.

It would be rather silly (from a business point of view) to encourage 50% of the population to stay home. Income tax is paid only by those who work. I don't think the gov't wants to cut it's revenue stream LOL.

Just last night, a co-worker went and picked up her little guy (age 2) and brought him back to work with her. He's a sweet, well adjusted doll of a boy who has been in daycare since she came back maternity leave when he was one.

Everyone I know who has their children in daycare have good kids. The bad ones I see are the one's where Mom waits on them hand and foot.

Kids in daycare aren't "indoctrinated" into anything. Kids need to be around other kids IMO.

[Hydraboss]

"By law, a 9 or 10 year old can stay home (after school for a couple of hours) by themselves. How do I know? I looked into it when my son was 10 and didn't want to go to after school care anymore. "

A child can stay home alone as long as they take and pass a "Home Alone" (or equivalent) program. It is illegal, however, for a child under 14 to be in charge of another child under 14 without adequate adult (14!) supervision. I have only checked into this in Alberta, so I am not sure how it applies to the rest of the country.

[Drea]

"By law, a 9 or 10 year old can stay home (after school for a couple of hours) by themselves. How do I know? I looked into it when my son was 10 and didn't want to go to after school care anymore. "

A child can stay home alone as long as they take and pass a "Home Alone" (or equivalent) program. It is illegal, however, for a child under 14 to be in charge of another child under 14 without adequate adult (14!) supervision. I have only checked into this in Alberta, so I am not sure how it applies to the rest of the country.

Until my son was 10 he went to after school care at the next door neighbour's. She has a small daycare. He got tired of being the "too big guy" and we decided he was responsible enough to be on his own for 1.5 hours.

I have only one though -- if I had two, such as yourself, I would keep at least the youngest, in after school care (2 can conive and get in trouble together!) In BC a child, after taking a babysitting course, can look after his/her siblings at age 12.

[Riverwind]

The entire issue revolves around the fact that there are not enough daycare spaces.

I don't have any issue with gov't providing capital to get the facilities built in the first place as long as the ongoing costs are paid for by parents.

It would be rather silly (from a business point of view) to encourage 50% of the population to stay home. Income tax is paid only by those who work. I don't think the gov't wants to cut it's revenue stream LOL.

Your economics is flawed. Spending $40-$60K subsidizing a day care space so someone else can work for 30K/year would not bring in more tax revenue - it would be a net cost to society. It makes more economic sense to have to that person stay at home and reduce taxes.

If people cannot earn enough money doing whatever job they do to pay for the cost of day care then they should not be working. Gov't subsidizes for daycare simply take money from people with good paying jobs (i.e. reduce their standard of living) and use that money to raise the standard of living for people with poorly paying jobs. It is a very inefficient way to redistribute income. I would rather see the money used to improve the quality of education in existing K-12 programs or even expand the system to provide more early education.

[geoffrey]

You hate conservative types that think you should have someone working and someone raising the kids. In today's world, more women are educated than men, so I think you might see more stay at home dads as the woman can make more cash.

Women are still making -- what was it -- 72% of what their male counterparts make. So this isn't going to happen for a generation or two.

I think thats generally because they have been traditionally less educated and less interested in increased responsibilities at work. With that dynamic changing, the pay rates will adjust to represent worth in the workplace, I have faith in that.

I should have clarified and said: Conservatives are making it harder for women to work. I should have said BY THE WAY, it takes $129,000 income to buy a house. My bad, sorry for not clarifying.

I for one, NEED a detached home.

Why do you NEED a detached home? Why do you NEED to live in Vancouver? These sound like wants, I'm sure your life wouldn't end if you couldn't live in these situations. It's nice, it's expected, but in certain housing markets, these 'NEEDS' just aren't possible for some people. Or in Vancouver's case, most people.

I don't want gov't to control everything. I have no hate on for conservatives. Some of the best conversations I've had are with conservatives. (Actually they are more than likely just centrists who lean a bit to the right LOL)

The birth control thing? Well this comment says to me: "I am a MAN and you WILL have sex with me, I don't care if you get pregnant, I don't care what happens, I just want to get my rocks off"

The kids were not exactly planned, but then I am an Alberta conservative....so....could you blame her?

Perhaps that's not what he meant, but that's certainly how it came across.

Women have many methods available to them now that really eliminate any blame being placed squarely on the man's shoulders. If a women doesn't want to have kids, she can prevent it pretty easy, without her partner even knowing. Theres some empowerment for you.

[Mimas]

I personally would rather see a check in the mail then have my kids in day care. I, like many Canadians, do not send my children to a day care centre. I think its complete arrogance to shove a child care program down my throat that does not benifit me.

Direct cash on the other hand benifits EVERY SINGLE CANADIAN FAMILY with Kids under the age of 6. Not just select few.

What do you guys think?

You lazy leech (or is that your stay-at-home wife) already get plenty of government assistance. It's called the National Child Benefit and pays as much as $6,000 per child per year. A daycare program is assistance for people who want to work and pay taxes. The Conservative $1200 is WELFARE for lazy parents who don't want to work and want to live off other WORKING people's taxes!

You conservative hypocrites go nuts when someone says that every Canadian should have food to put on the table even when one is unemployed, but when it comes to welfare for perfectly healthy capable adults who use their children as an excuse for not working it's a wonderful idea, eh? You make me want to puke!

[Mimas]

Like rent control in the 70's the Liberal plan will not increase actual seats. They may transfer existing seats to government subsidized seats. (Seats just refers to individual space in daycare)

The Conservative plan still offers $250 million in tax incentives to have the private sector add capacity.

Early child hood development may be a noble goal but can we start with access.

Right now we don't have enough daycare spots. The Conservative plan will go further to adding new spaces.

Real choice in child care. We need a scalable plan that parents can access. A new wait list wont help me.

Ok, genious, I disagree. Mike Harris offered the exact same plan to employers in Ontario. And you know how many "seats" were created? Exactly ZERO. The daycare plan will increase the total number of seats if it is properly funded. If not it will just shift more spaces from private to public. But this is exactly the point. The grade 8 drop-out down the street with her basement full of toys is NOT daycare!

[Mimas]

I'm conservative, from Alberta, and have two kids.....

When my wife and I had kids, she stayed home with them and then worked part time when she was able. She worked nights, and I worked days. Still like that almost ten years later.

The kids were not exactly planned, but then I am an Alberta conservative....so....could you blame her?

10 years later and the poor woman is still on nights!

Why doesn't she get a day job now that the kids are in school and be there for the evening.

So she gave up every evening for the past 10 years because you couldn't bag it?

Guess it was your conservative "husband's right" to have sex without birthcontrol huh?

IMO, give the woman a break -- you try the night shift for the next 10 years.

LOL and Geoffrey says "nothin' wrong with that set up!" Hyuk Hyuk.

On the news the other night -- a stay at home mom with a 2 year old, 1 year old twins, and one on the way. She's looking forward to spending the $5000 from the gov't on a vacation to Disneyland. Grrrreat! She's spending MY TAXPAYER DOLLARS in another friggin' country. Un-be-lievable.

Another woman, same news broadcast. Is on a 3 year waiting list for daycare space. By the time she gets the space, she won't need it anymore.

What a screwed up system the cons are putting in place.

Give the "traditional" family a vacation in Disneyland -- while the "regular" family struggles to find a space for their child.

The second family (the one looking for daycare space) pays much much more in taxes (2 income earners) than the glorified "traditional" family.

Thats quite a feminist selfish attitude. Maybe the mother actually values her childs upbringing more than her selfish personal interest.

It's obvious that you'd perfer a system where you give birth and thats the last you see of your kids other than a couple hours at night and the weekends. All in the name of 'women's right' to her selfish interest. How ridiculous.

Ok, another dumbass. Numerous studies have shown that children who go to daycare do better in school and in social interactions later in life. Keeping your kids locked up at home is not to their benefit! You probably think it is but that's because you are brainwashed and it never occured to you to do you homework and read up on it. Your claims are just as stupid as saying that children are better off being home-schooled.

[Mimas]

I'm conservative, from Alberta, and have two kids.....

When my wife and I had kids, she stayed home with them and then worked part time when she was able. She worked nights, and I worked days. Still like that almost ten years later.

The kids were not exactly planned, but then I am an Alberta conservative....so....could you blame her?

Yet another lazy Con, who is living on his wife's back. If you aren't a man to feed your family, what do you have against putting the kids in daycare, so that your wife could work during the day?

[Riverwind]

Yet another lazy Con, who is living on his wife's back. If you aren't a man to feed your family, what do you have against putting the kids in daycare, so that your wife could work during the day?

Can you spell troll?

[geoffrey]

I'm conservative, from Alberta, and have two kids.....

When my wife and I had kids, she stayed home with them and then worked part time when she was able. She worked nights, and I worked days. Still like that almost ten years later.

The kids were not exactly planned, but then I am an Alberta conservative....so....could you blame her?

Yet another lazy Con, who is living on his wife's back. If you aren't a man to feed your family, what do you have against putting the kids in daycare, so that your wife could work during the day?

Wow, so instead, he should take government handouts?

The ignorance here is staggering. Hyrdaboss would be an example of responsibility, not an example of 'living on his wife's back.'

And maybe he values his family more than the extra money, good on him. A parent at home with the kids all the time is the absolute ideal situation. Shame on you for being critical of that.

[wellandboy]

Mimas

Yet another lazy Con

Ok, another dumbass.

Ok, genious, I disagree.

You lazy leech

BE POLITE AND RESPECT OTHERS

Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity.

I guess this doesn't apply to you.

[Mimas]

Mimas

Yet another lazy Con

Ok, another dumbass.

Ok, genious, I disagree.

You lazy leech

BE POLITE AND RESPECT OTHERS

Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity.

I guess this doesn't apply to you.

No, I have very little tolerance for lazy, greedy losers who spend their days on the internet ranting about "everyone else spending their tax dollars". If you prefer living in a dump with sewage running down the streets and illiterate armed hooligans running around to paying taxes, move to Uganda or Ethiopia and SHUT UP!

[geoffrey]

No, I have very little tolerance for lazy, greedy losers who spend their days on the internet ranting about "everyone else spending their tax dollars". If you prefer living in a dump with sewage running down the streets and illiterate armed hooligans running around to paying taxes, move to Uganda or Ethiopia and SHUT UP!

And I've very little tolerance for people that believe the government should hold your hand from the cradle to the grave. If you prefer living in a statist society, with zero motivation for progress and massive welfare and lazy hooligans running around to actually working for what you have, move to North Korea or Cuba and SHUT UP!

[SamStranger]

Whoever posted on here "parents should take after their kids withour government help" or some crap is a complete asshole. You know how much it costs to raise kids? Before I became a "master carpenter" (15 years into the trade) I was barely making enough money to raise my 1 kid, now I have 4!!! i would have gone poor. $100 a month would not be a huge deal to me now that i grosse over $70 000 a year, but to a struggling family it will go a long way.

[Renegade]

Whoever posted on here "parents should take after their kids withour government help" or some crap is a complete asshole. You know how much it costs to raise kids? Before I became a "master carpenter" (15 years into the trade) I was barely making enough money to raise my 1 kid, now I have 4!!! i would have gone poor. $100 a month would not be a huge deal to me now that i grosse over $70 000 a year, but to a struggling family it will go a long way.

Yes it is costly to raise kids. Having kids of my own I know exactly how much. The equation is simple if it is too costly for you to have kids, DON'T HAVE ANY. You have a choice to make, but if you choose to have kids, stop whining about how you would have become poor because of it, and stop expecting a government handout for the choice YOU made.

[wellandboy]

Mimas

Yet another lazy Con

Ok, another dumbass.

Ok, genious, I disagree.

You lazy leech

BE POLITE AND RESPECT OTHERS

Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity.

I guess this doesn't apply to you.

No, I have very little tolerance for lazy, greedy losers who spend their days on the internet ranting about "everyone else spending their tax dollars". If you prefer living in a dump with sewage running down the streets and illiterate armed hooligans running around to paying taxes, move to Uganda or Ethiopia and SHUT UP!

Evidently, you have no tolerance whatsoever for anybody who disagrees with you, angry little person. Too bad because any validity to your arguments is overshadowed by your immature tirades.

[Renegade]

What do you guys think?

Whoever posted on here "parents should take after their kids withour government help" or some crap is a complete asshole.

Sam, first you solicit for opinions. Then you resort to name-calling to those who have a different opinion than your own. Interesting way to encourage debate.

If what you had wanted a bunch of cheerleaders echoing your opinion, you should have stated so explicitly.

[geoffrey]

Whoever posted on here "parents should take after their kids withour government help" or some crap is a complete asshole. You know how much it costs to raise kids? Before I became a "master carpenter" (15 years into the trade) I was barely making enough money to raise my 1 kid, now I have 4!!! i would have gone poor. $100 a month would not be a huge deal to me now that i grosse over $70 000 a year, but to a struggling family it will go a long way.

Come on Sam, lets be reasonable. What else should the government do for you? Buy your car? Your house? People can do really well once they leave the government teat.

Although Harper has some kind of plan to help with tradespersons tools, so it looks like your getting money anyways perhaps?

[gerryhatrick]

Dishonest poll, since the "Liberal" day care plan was not "institutionalized".

That's just a word with negative connotations that the Conservatives attached (with the help of a complicit media) to the Liberal day care plans.

The day cares would still be privately owned for the most part under what the Liberals were putting in place.

[wellandboy]

Dishonest poll, since the "Liberal" day care plan was not "institutionalized".

That's just a word with negative connotations that the Conservatives attached (with the help of a complicit media) to the Liberal day care plans.

The day cares would still be privately owned for the most part under what the Liberals were putting in place.

Uhh, that's not how I remember Captain Canada Martin spouting off about this during the election. Institutionalized more, private less as I recall, but then again it's easy to get confused listening to Captain Canada.

[Spike22]

Isn't it about time we let people control their own destiny in this world and not interfere in every darn personal issue: raising our kids, job creation etc. What pablum puking BS will it be next? Governement sponsored nursemaids because mothers refuse to do their motherly duties? Gotta run and join the MacCartney's and save a seal.

[justcrowing]

It was the feminists' pressure on stay-at-home mothers that has caused the alarming decay in society's fabric. I think government-run/organized daycares breed aggressive children by the very nature of the fact that mothers are not there to protect their child's rights -- the right to play with the toy they found first, for example.

It's power to the most powerful child and that carries on into adulthood. Parental love is the element that is missing in these daycare environments. I believe teens' joining gangs is a hindbrain attempt to be part of a "loyal" family -- any family. This behaviour often carries through to criminal activities, courts, jails, and ultimately to a total breakdown of society.

The federal Tory plan to reward the parents that are willing to make the sacrifices to stay home and raise their own kids is the right plan. Reward them with tax breaks of every kind. Parents will benefit, children will benefit, and so will society. An unintended consequence will be that it will cost less in the long run.

Tell us how, as a child, you spent too much time with your mother and too little with your babysitter?

[betsy]

Probably wouldn't have kids if that was the situation

That probably won't be an issue. I don't think chicks dig conservative guys anyway.

You must mean, Liberal chicks don't dig conservative guys. Chances are, it won't work anyway. So better off to find someone with similar views.

[betsy]

In one breath we hear that women should stay home and rasie their children, in the next breath we are told that women, especially single parent women should be out working to support themselves and their children.

It's nice that you all are able to work one in the daytime and one at night so you don't need childcare. But there are a lot of women and some men who don't have that option.

I wonder how many women and men are suddenly, by a sudden death, the main breadwinner. I was lucky I had a mother and mother in law at home when that happened to me. That is no longer an option for many young mothers.

If all the women stayed home and their income was cut what would happen to the many jobs now depending on their buying power?

I read a diatribe not too long ago from a young person who resented the fact that families with children with problems such as Autism have no right to expect her taxes to pay for their children. She did not want children and they should not expect her to pay for theirs.

I empathize with your loss Margrace...and that of others who had found themselves suddenly alone trying to raise a family.

But, widows and single-parents have more monetary support now...what with widow's pensions, insurance, child allowance, child support and alimony. Make do with that! Instead of whining about no one helping (as if those government freebies just materialized out of thin air), tackle the situation and make the most of what they have.

Why should other people, who had nothing to do with the planning and choice that these women made in having children be obligated to support them financially? Tax payers are supporting these children and women and children already!

These women should have to try to make ends meet, even if it means hand-to-mouth existence. Didn't they know there's a consequence for every action?

So they live on poverty line....and that's the price for some. Some will just have to bite the bullet and weather the storm.