Politician pandering for votes (because funding childcare isn't going to bring the economy back) by offering universal (AKA taxpayer funded) pre-k (AKA daycare) for kids 3 and 4. If the brats aren't potty-trained and are too young to be in kindergarten it is daycare. With piss poor parunting these days it would be the rare kid that would be potty-trained before age 3. Universal pre-k to the rescue!

Why bother to have brats if you're just going to send them off to someone else to take care of at age 3? At least in the Victorian era families had to pay out of pocket to send their kids off for someone else to take care of. People behave very different when they have to pay for something and their wallet takes the hit. If anything these politics will encourage more irresponsible behavior and it will just be the typical "Munich" scenario where more and more freebies will be demanded as a result. Murika land of the entitlement.

Link https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/elizabeth-warren-says-child-care-is-key-to-bringing-the-economy-back/ar-BB17EUfc?li=BBnb7Kz
She's been pushing this for a long time and she is using COVID to push for her agenda, which is happening with a lot of issues but pisses me off just the same.

Quote

If you want this economy to work, if you want to boost our G.D.P., or now, during a pandemic, if you want to get people back to work, then we need to make a national investment.

I fail to see how getting "free" universal chyld care situation will help the COVID crisis. First of all, people have to be working in order to afford chyld care.

Quote

Child care workers are now essential workers. They are mostly Black and brown women. And they are putting their lives, their families’ health, on the line to care for children so that nurses and grocery store workers can keep the rest of this economy going.

Doctors and nurses make good money. If they need to keep working during a pandemic, and the market is creating a shortage of chyld care workers, the market will correct this perceived problem. People who are willing to watch children and do a good job will get more money to do so. Perhaps Breeders will realize if they are going to have kids, they need to pay more to get quality chyld care if they are not going to do it themselves. I'm a fiscal conservative in general and I have no problem with people being accountable for their personal choices. Perhaps this will cause people to limit their family size to what they can afford even if that means zero children until someone gets a better job.

I see no downside to any of this.

Unfortunately, suggesting that people wait until they can afford kids is now considered "elitist" or worse yet, racist.

I do fear the Left and Right will unite during this situation and get this passed, rendering the government even more broke than it is now.

The disappearance of middle class jobs (erosion of unions) and the expense of getting a specialized job today (college expenses) are real hurdles for people who are trying to climb out of poverty. It may occur to the Right to throw these people the chyld care bone to keep them right there: having brats they cannot afford, so they are an easily-exploitable labor pool. Sure, the government will pay for daycare for your kids so you can work overtime in the Amazon warehouse and have to wear diapers because you don't have time to go to the bathroom. And after they toss you out when you can no longer do the job, there will be a long line of others right behind you who are in similar situations.

Yeah I'm cynical.
Yeah, I was afraid it would be Elizabeth Warren. The free pre-K crap is a big issue for Democrats in general (spoiler: I am one). I bloody hate that, because we all know where the money comes from for those goodies. But the GOP is pretty big on breeding too, and the rest of its platform is godawful, so I stick with the Dems.

Anyway, it’s strange how people want kyds sooo much, then they want to put them in chyldcare after a few months. What happened to the joys of parenting? Oh, that’s right, kyds are expensive! Who knew?openmouthed shock Maybe that where the trope of “hardworking famblees” comes from. Meaning only the parunts, or parunt, works, since chyld labor isn’t a thing in the U.S. Government at any level doesn’t need to offer more benefits to parunts, since people will breed anyway.

It takes a child to raze a village.
Quote
freya
Politician pandering for votes (because funding childcare isn't going to bring the economy back) by offering universal (AKA taxpayer funded) pre-k (AKA daycare) for kids 3 and 4. If the brats aren't potty-trained and are too young to be in kindergarten it is daycare. With piss poor parunting these days it would be the rare kid that would be potty-trained before age 3. Universal pre-k to the rescue!

Why bother to have brats if you're just going to send them off to someone else to take care of at age 3? At least in the Victorian era families had to pay out of pocket to send their kids off for someone else to take care of. People behave very different when they have to pay for something and their wallet takes the hit. If anything these politics will encourage more irresponsible behavior and it will just be the typical "Munich" scenario where more and more freebies will be demanded as a result. Murika land of the entitlement.

Link https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/elizabeth-warren-says-child-care-is-key-to-bringing-the-economy-back/ar-BB17EUfc?li=BBnb7Kz

Don't worry, Covid 19 will make sure that any brat under age three today won't see childcare as a thing until their thirties. This virus is perminant, and we will be on lockdown until then at least.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Quote
bell_flower
She's been pushing this for a long time and she is using COVID to push for her agenda, which is happening with a lot of issues but pisses me off just the same.

What about extending the unemployment extra $600? This could be done until needed but it isn't permanent. And it helps those directly in need. And once it is no longer needed the supplement can be ended.

Quote
bell_flower
Doctors and nurses make good money. If they need to keep working during a pandemic, and the market is creating a shortage of chyld care workers, the market will correct this perceived problem. People who are willing to watch children and do a good job will get more money to do so. Perhaps Breeders will realize if they are going to have kids, they need to pay more to get quality chyld care if they are not going to do it themselves. I'm a fiscal conservative in general and I have no problem with people being accountable for their personal choices. Perhaps this will cause people to limit their family size to what they can afford even if that means zero children until someone gets a better job.

I see no downside to any of this.

Unfortunately, suggesting that people wait until they can afford kids is now considered "elitist" or worse yet, racist.

I do fear the Left and Right will unite during this situation and get this passed, rendering the government even more broke than it is now.

The disappearance of middle class jobs (erosion of unions) and the expense of getting a specialized job today (college expenses) are real hurdles for people who are trying to climb out of poverty. It may occur to the Right to throw these people the chyld care bone to keep them right there: having brats they cannot afford, so they are an easily-exploitable labor pool. Sure, the government will pay for daycare for your kids so you can work overtime in the Amazon warehouse and have to wear diapers because you don't have time to go to the bathroom. And after they toss you out when you can no longer do the job, there will be a long line of others right behind you who are in similar situations.

Yeah I'm cynical.

The elitist argument is weird to me. Elitists are in the category where they are least affected by taxation (or could easily be) because they are living on an inheritance or could afford to either retire or move to another country. The people the tax increase would affect the worst are the wage slaves. And anyone earning an income who doesn't have children at 3 or 4 years of age falls into this category because they are all going to pay for this. Better to just save for pre-school parents than to be paying for it for most of your working life. There is already a $3000 child care tax credit anyways. An extra $500 annually tax increase works out to $15K over 30 years.

Exactly, the people working can keep their same arrangements. They don't need universal preschool. I really don't like the idea of people having kids they can't afford and becoming part of the easily exploitable labor pool. I realize it happens but we don't need the government passing laws to augment it.
In the USA, it is the Trump administration's opinion that truly needy families need to blow their brains out with a shotgun.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login