To think if childcare was free or heavily subsidised it would solve a lot of problems?

[Dormouse14]

I can't think who it wouldn't benefit.

A good nursery or childminder that was provided for by the state - as schools are - would enable parents who want to work to do so meaning there wasn't a reliance on benefits for single parents and they'd then be paying tax.

Some children would benefit greatly - I mean children who perhaps don't come from orderly homes.

I'm not saying everyone would have to send their child but if the option was there! wouldn't it make a difference to many people?

Have you read the thread LePetit?

I am not paying for it. I'm not in the uk. If I was in the uk I would be at home on benefits.

I'm not rehashing a conversation from three hours ago because you can't be arsed to read my posts properly.

Germany's is not similar, they have a much stronger economic bass. France more similar granted but work week capped to 35 hours.

Base

I'll try to find it, it was a whole ago that I read it. There are more contradictory studies on the advantages and disadvantages than you can shake a stick at though - I think every family makes the decision that's best for them at the time and more often than not these studies are used as a stick to beat women with. Not saying you were doing that, as I know you specifically said not necessarily the mother. But that's what they have become in many instances - and those which are anti childcare always seem to get more publicity than those supportive of it.

Oh, and I don't doubt that the wrong childcare can be stressful - one of the children DH cares for was at a nursery which was totally wrong for her and it was taking a physical toll on her (won't describe what if you don't mind). Within a week of moving here she was getting considerably better - she needed a different setting, different carer etc. My own DD went to a nursery part time from about 10 months and loved it - but she's very sociable and outgoing and has been since very young.

But having information gives parents informed choices.

I am a Surrey based childminder and charge £5.50 per hour per child. That is about mid rate around here. I can care for 3 under 5s at a time. My own youngest child takes up one of those places so mostly I earn £11 per hour before tax and expenses. Its OK. Not fantastic but OK. I am well educated and earned very well in the city pre children.
Subsidised childcare could have advantages but it would have to be very different from how it is done now.
I am able to accept 3 year olds for their funded 15 hours. My council will however only pay me about £3.50 per hour for these children and I am not allowed to ask the parents to top up to my normal rate. If I had 2 mindees on that rate plus my own daughter all my places are filled for not even minimum wage! The result is I do notaaccept funded 3 year olds in my setting. I can't afford to do so.
For funded 2 year olds however I would be paid £6.50 per hour. More than I actually normally charge, but. ....what do I do when they turn 3 and my earnings nearly halve? I haven't been in this situation yet but I don't think I would take on a funded 2 year old because of this. Build up trust and a relationship with a possibly vulnerable 2 year old but only for 1 year due to finances - no thank you.
The current method of subsidised childcare is for childminders pretty rubbish frankly.

StatisticallyChallenged

Don't you charge extra for Extras? Like special trips in the holidays and things like softplay? Surely fees just cover what you do at home plus trips to the park?

No. No. No. Sorry but really disagree with nursery being best option for under 3s.

Problem is housing being too expensive, flexible/part time well paid jobs being too few and far between, care not being shared well between parents.

Probably get flamed for this but not a go at working mums, more a go at societal pressures and dads!

Germany differs a lot between the regions when it comes to childcare. I live in an area where every 2 year old gets a free part time place, usually 8-12. Full time places are hard to come by though, you have to be in employment and on a waiting list (but once you're in it's only lunch money, ca €50 a month). Under 2s is even harder to get in. Childminders are seen as the 'luxury' option, as part of the fee the parent has to pay oneself and that's a bit higher than crèche fees for under 2s. But this is in my area! In others it can be a whole lot more expensive, not quite London prices where we lived before, but not to the point where some of my friends choose to stay at home because it's not worth it for several kids.

Wouldn't it be simpler to raise minimum wage? If you did that then other wages would have to rise but people could afford childcare.

Taking tax off people to subsidize childcare seems a very cluncky system.

I think an extra tax on any company that pays CEOs more than 100 x their lowest paid worker's hourly rate would a) bring in tax revenue and b) make it cheaper for companies to pay more to the lowest paid.

As a child minder I currently charge £3 an hour. I could apply to provide the free 15 hours a week in Wales but the local athourity would pay me even less per hour.

Nannyogg, we sometimes charge extra for the older kids when it's special holiday related trips as we've had to find a balance but we don't think it's fair to charge the younger year round kids extra, and there's also the entry fees for our family which we wouldn't incur otherwise -trust me, we would not do that many trips if it was just us! Plus extra fuel, picnic food, drinks and snacks when out.the local museum is free but the parking sure isn't! Even if it's a trip where we asked parents to contribute it all adds up, but we're fine with that as it's the sort of service we've chosen to provide and we're super busy so it works for us Softplay etc we always cover hence having membership of local ones.

Obviously every cm is different, but was just making the point it's not a massive moneyspinner where you take in hundred in fees and spend nothing like some people think. Providing a good, stimulating service is expensive!

I read an article a while back saying that the UK and Denmark spent around the same amount on family welfare type benefits. The difference was the UK spent 20% on subsidised services and 80% on direct benefits, eg. child tax credits whilst Denmark spent the majority of it's bill on subsidised services such as childcare. So I'm not sure that the UK can't afford it is correct, it may not cost any more.

Most childcare facilities, be it a nursery or a childminder, have very slender profit margins even at the top rates. Usually the higher prices are to meet rental or mortgage costs as well as higher staffing costs in expensive areas.

Dormouse, you said right at the top of your OP: "I can't think who it wouldn't benefit."

Are you suggesting that if there was all this subsidised childcare, more people would work (assuming we could create all the extra jobs), who would pay more taxes, which would fund the subsidised childcare?

Because unless the extra tax brought in was MORE than the cost of the subsidised childcare, your argument is a non-starter. For one, any single people without children will clearly not benefit! They MIGHT benefit if it brought in sufficient additional revenue to improve other services, such as the NHS, lower general taxation levels or improved state pensions.

There would be societal pressure for families to use the childcare as there is for families to use the 15 hours for three year old. Then house prices etc would adjust even more for two wages being the norm. I think the idea of full time hours being 40 hours needs to reduce.

Most childcare facilities, be it a nursery or a childminder, have very slender profit margins even at the top rates

Completely disagree with this, based on my experience. For nurseries anyway.

I work for a bank (business side) and several of my clients are nurseries. In ten years of banking, I've had lots of clients with all types of business who are struggling...builders, solicitors, IT specialist, recruitment agencies...lots of business hit the skids at some point.

I've never, ever, had a nursery account that was struggling. To the contrary, they all seem to be doing remarkably well, regardless of economic conditions at that time.

I know technically that is just anecdotal evidence, but I have a shit load of anecdotal evidence and not one example that deviates from that 'norm'.

If you take it to an extreme what happens?

24/7 childcare, parents expected to work any time of day (as childcare is provided free by the state), children are raised by the state, taken shortly after birth never to see their parents again.

Extreme, yes. Possible, maybe, or maybe only in Science fiction books.

People do not work 9-5 Mon-Fri now, so if there was free childcare, what would there be to limit the hours/days people worked?

Didn't Elizabeth Truss look into how other countries did things?

High state funding of childcare could be good but what would the non-money cost be? Would it be that employers required parents to work longer for low wages? Would women be pressurised to go back to work shortly after having a child? Would children become institutionalised due to spending long periods in large group childcare (I would doubt the state would have small facilities, more likely they would have large childcare centres).

Maybe Government could trial it, by letting childcare element of tax credits claimants choose between getting tax credits, or getting all childcare paid? However parents in that position would have to realise they lose all benefits, not just childcare element.

Vermillion, I'd guess they are probably well established companies who either own their premises or have been renting them for years on good deals etc. It is incredibly expensive to set up a new childcare facility - trust me, I'm trying to do so at the moment. Between the regulatory requirements which hugely restrict the premises which can be used (lots of older places don't comply with the new rules but get away with it), staffing ratios, set up costs - it's not some easy little moneyspinner. There have also been 3 I can think of around here which have folded in the last few years due to lack of numbers.

YANBU and it works in other countries quite well.

It would mean more women in the work place, more women being hired (employers not refusing to hire them because they might leave one day).

It would mean women doing better in their careers making more money and paying higher tax rates.

To all those asking how other countries afford it, they seem to afford it through higher taxation (Sweden income tax is 31% for the lowest band) or by having private health insurance. (Germany) I suspect if we brought it in here it might slightly lower taxes,( assuming that all these jobs that would be available pay a level that would be taxable)but the cost of health insurance would probably replace the cost of childcare. And then everyone would have to pay for insurance, even those without children, and those with children who don't use childcare. So I am not sure if that would help.

writtenguarantee your post above makes me want to scream!!! Argh!

why? if you read my last sentence I said it sounds like a difficult job with not so great variable pay. I of course want CMs to make a profit. What I was wondering about is why it costs so much here, compared to other places.

@StatisticallyChallenged You included the cost of an extra room, but that of course is not money down the drain. That's an investment likely. When you stop childminding, you will have an extra room in your house.

It's money down the drain if you are renting. And it's an expense you wouldn't have if you weren't childminding. It's still a cost that comes out of the income and means it's not a cheap thing to do. If you have bought you might own that extra room at the end of it but it doesn't change the fact you need to pay for it in order to childmind.

However, you clearly have made up your mind that childminders are just milking hardworking parents and making a fortune for sitting around drinking tea all day.

I should be clear that I was genuinely wondering, and the reason why is that I have paid for unsubsidized childcare in other countries (as a visitor, so no access to any subsidized care that residents get) and even that is much less expensive than here.

My other comment about StatisticallyChallenged costings is that it sounds like she (or her DH, whoever does it) provides a lot of activities for the price. The quotes in our neighbourhood was 20 pounds for after school care, and that included nothing - no soft play, no car, no zoo, just pick up and play in the CM's home.