Harper promises to...

[EnviroTO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

Good grief. Most respondents like Harper's "day care plan" which involves taking taxes collected by people and giving it back to parents. Hello? That's not a plan.

Unfortunately too many people buy into the "freedom" of choice argument but don't understand how it ties into economics nor the importance of getting lower income families kids into day care. If every parent has an extra $1200 per year the demand goes up thus the price goes up and swallows the $1200. Net benefit... zero... your taxes are driving up day care prices and ending up in private hands and if you can't afford daycare you probably still can't, not to mention a low income household is likely to spend the $1200 on something else because they can't afford the rest of the fees. Montessori school costs $10,500/yr for a parent working 9-5... that $1200 off isn't going to do much for a low income family... especially when the prices go up $1200 because everyone has an extra $1200 to spend.

The whole argument for public only healthcare system is that a public healthcare doesn't need to compete for staff, doesn't aim to make profit, and is equally accessible to families of any income level. Why are the same people that support public healthcare supporting a money back plan for day care? What if Harper used the same solution for healthcare... here is cash in the amount of 15% of the cost of health insurance... public healthcare is over and go spend your money on what you want?

Why is Martin not verbalizing the negative aspects of Harper's GST and day care plan? Is he dense? Economists came out in agreement that GST is not the appropriate tax to cut but Martin has been silent. Now the polls are showing support for the Harper "day care plan" and still I don't see the rebuttal. If the whole campaign goes like this and Layton manages to prevent strategic voting to keep NDP votes my concern is Harper could pull off a majority as people who are laid back Liberals don't bother showing up to the polls because they think "it will be a Liberal minority anyways and its too cold out".

 

[dan e 1980]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

i never thought about it that way enviro.

and for real, if the liberals don't get a good plan happening soon, we could very well see harper as PM. :eek

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

Unfortunately too many people buy into the "freedom" of choice argument but don't understand how it ties into economics nor the importance of getting lower income families kids into day care. If every parent has an extra $1200 per year the demand goes up thus the price goes up and swallows the $1200. Net benefit... zero... your taxes are driving up day care prices and ending up in private hands and if you can't afford daycare you probably still can't, not to mention a low income household is likely to spend the $1200 on something else because they can't afford the rest of the fees. Montessori school costs $10,500/yr for a parent working 9-5... that $1200 off isn't going to do much for a low income family... especially when the prices go up $1200 because everyone has an extra $1200 to spend.

You would be correct if the supply of daycare resources stayed fixed while demand increased due to the extra $1200. That's extremely unlikely to happen. What's a lot more likely to happen is that people will be attracted to working in daycare as the price goes up. The additional supply will act to moderate the price increases, with the eventual increase between $0-1200, depending on how attractive daycare work is.

 

[afransen TO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

drunksubmrnr,

There is already a glut of 'early childhood education' workers. So much so that average daycare staff make little above minimum wage despite college education. And yet daycare is too expensive for many. I fear that most of the extra $1200 per child will be gobbled up by inflation...

On the other hand, my ideal plan would be to offer people a geared-to-income choice of supplement for stay-at-home parents or daycare subsidy.

 

[EnviroTO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

I think the government should be focused on providing public daycare, not giving out money. Why should parents that don't need daycare get extra spending money that they can use on a new DVD player? The point of tax dollars is to provide public services and create a social net, not to pay people for not using public services. If I don't have a child should I get a refund too? What about healthcare? I don't get sick much so give me a credit?

There are low income single parent families that need FREE daycare and it should be the goal to provide FREE daycare for those that need it. Martin's plan will lower the cost of daycare for parents more than Harpers because it creates public daycare spaces that take people out of the private system therefore creating openings in private daycare without increasing prices. People who need daycare to be free will be able to get it with Martin's public daycare plan while someone with $1200 and rising daycare costs would not.

The only good part of the Harper plan is the daycare credits to employers that create daycare spaces because it is the increase of spaces without increasing buying power that will lower daycare costs. But that isn't the candy that will draw voters blindly... those people see GST credit and money handouts and think they won a lottery. These people don't realize that if everyone on the planet wins a lottery with a $20 million prize value that they are no further ahead because market driven economics will make that $20 million worthless.

 

[afransen TO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

In some cases it pays to have a single mother stay home and care for her kids herself rather than go out and work for $10 an hour and have the government pay $15 per hour in childcare.

 

[EnviroTO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

The issue is that Harpers plan is to give parents a cash equivalent of about $0.68 per hour towards day care. A serious amount of money would be required to convince single mothers to stay home, not 68 cents per hour or thereabouts. A properly run public daycare center can have one trained and capable person looking after more than one toddler and allows the toddler a chance to interact with other children... it is a fairly good option from a national productivity standpoint and from a child development standpoint. The only hole in the plan is that maternity now lasts a year (which is better than before) and daycare is beneficial starting at age 2 1/2... there is a gap between age 1 and 2 1/2 where a parent should be home but there is no government benefit to assist parents at that point.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

There is already a glut of 'early childhood education' workers. So much so that average daycare staff make little above minimum wage despite college education. And yet daycare is too expensive for many. I fear that most of the extra $1200 per child will be gobbled up by inflation...

Given that one early childhood worker can probably look after about 8 kids, you're looking at a ~10K increase in income for that worker. That will probably pull a lot more people into the business, and may even allow for an increase in physical plant, such as their own building etc.

If there was a glut of these workers, there wouldn't be a shortage. It can't be both ways.

Kevin

 

[afransen TO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

Lots of workers, but not a lot of actual daycares. Many people in the field don't find jobs, hence the low wage rate.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

Lots of workers, but not a lot of actual daycares.

Sorry, I didn't explain that well. It's what I meant with the comment on "physical plant".

Kevin

 

[afransen TO]

Re: Harper promises to repeal the law of gravity

I understand the terminology. You seemed to imply that an increase in funding per child would increase wages. I was expressing my doubts. I doubt the increase in funding would lead to much increase in capacity or wage....