• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Daycare Be Subsidized

Should Daycare Be Subsidized?

  • Yes, Should Be Fixed Price (Quebec)

    Votes: 2 5.0%
  • Yes, Means-Tested (France)

    Votes: 8 20.0%
  • No, It Should Not Be Subsidized

    Votes: 30 75.0%

  • Total voters
    40
The couple in the article and many like them are probably engineers, accountants, etc. they make over 100,000$ but 20,000/year is still a lot of money for daycare. Subsidizing daycare is also how we encourage people to get that education to get that well-paying job.
I have a nephew that got out of the Marines, opend a biz and makes easy 200K now at 26 years old.
He gets a few bucks for a messed up knee, but otherwise not a penny of anything else.
Married, 3 children all day care age.
Its called planning.
 
Fine, as long as its a REQUIREMENT. Not sit at home and drop baby off so mom can sleep all day and party all night.
I see that exact thing first hand.

If a prenat is staying at home there is no reason to send your kid to daycare and even at 7$/day unless both parents are working you won't be able afford that. I would also extend it to full-time education aswell.
 
Lifes lessons are tough.

Sure. We all deal with the consequences though. Practicality is my overriding concern. Pretending that entitlements are going to either disappear or be fixed and crafting legislation accordingly is disastrous. The people who end up not finding jobs, not getting educated, not getting insured, etc, are the people who will draw those huge sums of money from welfare and aid coffers in the future. You will pay for him and his child one way or another. If you can intervene early and set him and by extension his family on a better path I think it pays to do so.

My problem is that these well intentioned (and practical) diversions never stay that way. It becomes too easy to include more and more people under its mandate, it becomes too easy for institutions to begin raising rates to adjust for guaranteed government credit from their clients, it becomes too easy for voters to demand more and more, and eventually it becomes an entitlement that does an incredible amount of damage.

It's frustrating and I'm skeptical because of it.
 
I have a nephew that got out of the Marines, opend a biz and makes easy 200K now at 26 years old.
He gets a few bucks for a messed up knee, but otherwise not a penny of anything else.
Married, 3 children all day care age.
Its called planning.

I agree, we should make policy based on the best possible scenario. Zuckerberg (Facebook fame) was like 23 when we became a multi-millionaire. No one should get any hands up.
 
If a prenat is staying at home there is no reason to send your kid to daycare and even at 7$/day unless both parents are working you won't be able afford that. I would also extend it to full-time education aswell.
As long as its a requirement and there were verifications that went along with it.
 
Sign me up for that.

Well, there's 2. Hey 0bserver, can you make a poll that asks if we should get subsidized Ferraris? I mean, if you're advocating for the government to dish out for everyone's wants, I consider it valid.
 
I agree, we should make policy based on the best possible scenario. Zuckerberg (Facebook fame) was like 23 when we became a multi-millionaire. No one should get any hands up.
As long as they are fully vested in the program fine.
But if they are going to slack around, nope. Not a penny.
 
I have a nephew that got out of the Marines, opend a biz and makes easy 200K now at 26 years old.
He gets a few bucks for a messed up knee, but otherwise not a penny of anything else.
Married, 3 children all day care age.
Its called planning.

Do you hate people getting jobs and an education or what? Most people who would benefit form this are people who work in large cities in the financial or knowledge sectors daycare might be cheaper where he is or in the Southern U.S. but here daycare is rather expensive.
 
A tax credit is not the same as a direct subsidy and offsets less of the cost of a subsidy we have a similar thing here but it is still insanely expensive.
A tax credit only differs from a subsidy in it's method of distribution and payment duty cycle.
It still reduces the cost of a product to the end user.
I can see part of your point, with the tax credit, the vendor can just raise prices to soak
up the credit, where as a fixed price just soaks the taxpayer.
Price fixing also had unseen landmines, supposed the low fixed price drives the operators out of business?
 
If a prenat is staying at home there is no reason to send your kid to daycare and even at 7$/day unless both parents are working you won't be able afford that. I would also extend it to full-time education aswell.

What a hypocrite. Your entire premise for this thread is to shell out government money to pay for something parents can't afford, yet you say they shouldn't do this because they cannot afford it.

You libs just like to pick and choose your own damned causes, don't you?
 
Price fixing also had unseen landmines, supposed the low fixed price drives the operators out of business?

I imagine the fixed price is only for the parents...not the government.
 
You should move to Somalia.

Because I find that you guys are bunch of crybabies? Holy crap, is there a day that goes by when you guys aren't thinking of ideas on what entitlements you can create?
 
Well, there's 2. Hey 0bserver, can you make a poll that asks if we should get subsidized Ferraris? I mean, if you're advocating for the government to dish out for everyone's wants, I consider it valid.

Well daycare actually benefits society as a whole as it is better to have a well educated working populace then a uneducated unemployed populace. If you subsidize daycare you get else people collecting unemployment, less welfare, less food stamps because people can work. I guess your against public education aswell.
 
Because I find that you guys are bunch of crybabies? Holy crap, is there a day that goes by when you guys aren't thinking of ideas on what entitlements you can create?

No, it's because I don't want to live in the country you envision.
 
This is one of those things that I'm extremely sympathetic to but very wary of. I have two friends who had mistakes and are now parents at a very young age. It makes it extremely difficult for them to continue with school, hold a job, and build a better future for themselves and their family. In principle I think an extremely targeted program even if its just at a state level would be helpful to people like him and would end up benefiting us all in the long run because of his increased earning power, job prospects, and educational attainment. But these programs are ruined because they never stay narrow. The band of inclusion grows and grows and a multi-million dollar program becomes a multi-billion dollar program which is no longer a limited piece of assistance to those who need it, but a core entitlement which cannot be shorn or reformed.

The real issue is that we subsidize and make excuses for so much bad behavior that there is little real incentive to use these programs as desired. Your friends might see "free" daycare as an opportunity to get an education then find a good paying job but there would undoubtedly be more people who would see it as an opportunity to watch daytime television and dick around all day without kids to watch as the government pays all their other bills.
 
I imagine the fixed price is only for the parents...not the government.

Yes you pay 7$ and the Quebec government pays the rest. See states rights (I know you Americans love it) can also be a plus in this aswell as the states will compete to be the most parent friendly state.
 
As long as they are fully vested in the program fine.
But if they are going to slack around, nope. Not a penny.

So...let's do what we can to make sure they are fully vested...
 
Well daycare actually benefits society as a whole as it is better to have a well educated working populace then a uneducated unemployed populace. If you subsidize daycare you get else people collecting unemployment, less welfare, less food stamps because people can work. I guess your against public education aswell.

If they were truly well-educated, they'd wait to have children. There's just no argument to that statement right there, although I do enjoy watching you try.

Sorry, my tax dollars should exist to curb irresponsibility, not endorse it.
 
As long as its a requirement and there were verifications that went along with it.

That would be means-testing in France and government approval in Quebec.
 
If they were truly well-educated, they'd wait to have children. There's just no argument to that statement right there, although I do enjoy watching you try.

Sorry, my tax dollars should exist to curb irresponsibility, not endorse it.

How long should they wait? Till it extremely difficult to have children?
 
No, it's because I don't want to live in the country you envision.

What will I ever do with myself if everyone else isn't paying my way?!! What in the hell is the point in moving out of your parents house if you just turn around and make the government your mommy? WTF is that about? You effectively didn't do squat.
 
I imagine the fixed price is only for the parents...not the government.
Why, If the Government is writing the law, why would they leave a blank check on the table.
 
A tax credit only differs from a subsidy in it's method of distribution and payment duty cycle.
It still reduces the cost of a product to the end user.
I can see part of your point, with the tax credit, the vendor can just raise prices to soak
up the credit, where as a fixed price just soaks the taxpayer.
Price fixing also had unseen landmines, supposed the low fixed price drives the operators out of business?

It wouldn't drive them out of business as like I said it's a subsidy you pay and the government pays the rest though they would probably negotiate a set price. Like you not going to see the government subsidizing fancy special daycares that say have expensive organic food.
 
Back
Top Bottom