To think there should be more funding for under 3yo childcare?

[Rainbowhairdontcare]

I know things are better nowadays, but still find it disheartening that two parents in FT work will only get the "tax-free" childcare help (around 20%). Our take-home pay is around £2k after commuting costs, £1k go to housing and utility bills (CT, energy, and broadband) and then 800 go to childcare even after that 20% off. Leaving us with £200 to feed ourselves, unexpected bills, road tax, insurance, etc..

Our basic UC is 750 +650 of childcare. Our deduction is £1350 so we're still better off with tax free childcare. As this is unsustainable, DH will have to go part time. A bit unfortunate given we don't want to rely on the system, but it's what works out best for our family. We'd both like to work FYT but because childcare is too expensive we can't afford to work as much as we'd like.

Personally I think universal childcare is the answer.

myself2020 - OK by your way of thinking, the Government should totally subsidise children, disabled children, the elderly, the disabled, the sick, the down and outs, the druggies, the plain old weirdoes? Who is going to pay for this? The money does not exist. The only people left to pay for it through their taxes are young to middle-aged, able, NORMAL people!

milktray well all the parents who could return to work years sooner would help...

I'm in support of higher taxes but subsidised childcare wouldn't be first on my list for more funding (even though I would benefit). I'd prefer the money went on education and healthcare.

I'm not sure both parents working FT with children in FT childcare from a very young age should be promoted as the "best" scenario. Obviously a totally valid choice if that's what families want to do but I don't think one or both parents going part time for a while or becoming a SAHP for a few years is a lesser option.

We do and we shouldn’t have to! If someone has children they should self-fund them 100%

We should otherwise (at its most extreme):

• Only the rich could have children
• Anyone who isn't rich with children would end up living in poverty reducing the life chances of their children
• If most children grow up in poverty then there won't be any skilled workforce for companies to employ.
• There would be a collapse in the native population as more and more people who cannot afford children don't have them
• We would have to have a huge increase in immigration to cover basic and more complex jobs
• This would lead to an increase in money leaving our country as workers will send money home to their families
• There could be a collapse in our economy as none of the natives could afford anything that we produce and companies would move elsewhere
• There could be a society collapse as there will be no-one to look after the elderly, to keep the basics such as electricity, water and the such like going and few people to produce food for us to eat

I'm not sure both parents working FT with children in FT childcare from a very young age should be promoted as the "best" scenario. Obviously a totally valid choice if that's what families want to do but I don't think one or both parents going part time for a while or becoming a SAHP for a few years is a lesser option.*

I at least haven't said that. But under that vision, if one of us becomes a SAHP or goes PT then the subsidies kick in.

The government for a family with one MW will subsidise for one parent to stay at home. In my case in particular, my DHs salary as a SAHP subsidised by the government is of around £300.

If we both work, we don't get that, we'd get instead £200. We'd still have commuting costs and childcare costs. In our circumstances we're better off my one of us staying at home. If one of us went part time, the subsidy would be higher but that doesn't necessarily means we're better off.

£2k take home pay is very low for two adults in full time work. How much are you spending on commuting? Is there no way to move nearer work/get work nearer home?

This is a tricky one - my children are 4 and 1. We live in an expensive area but our salaries are very average. Childcare is hugely expensive and the costs increase yearly. We are lucky to have family help otherwise we would be on the breadline, and we both have professional jobs. However I also accept that good childcare costs money and some childminders and nurseries have already had to shut up shop due to the 30 funded hours shambles. If more funding means more providers going out of business then it’s not a good idea. Who would look after our children then?

Who would look after our children then?

Are you serious? How about the free childcare they get at birth.

@Earslaps is correct.

Plus the government is not handing out the additional 15 hours because they care. It's actually quite a struggle to pay for childcare & stay working until a child is 3 plus remember that the "free hours" are not for the whole year but TTO & often you have pay for food, nappies extra. The additional 15 hours are an incentive to keep higher paid people in work & paying tax. If someone earns 40k they are paying more than 9k in tax & NI, the gov gives a nursery about £6 an hour for the 15 hours so x that by 38wks = 3.5k. They want more people to pay tax.

Also we have an ageing population & a shrinking tax paying population with quite a high burden eg increased education & housing costs. Our birth rate is dropping, if that continues we will need more immigration to shoulder that burden.

We spend about £500 a month between us. With our salaries we're priced out of a town closer to our work places. (We need to make 3x rent, which we don't). So we bought a house that we could afford.

My DH could go back to retail (something we're currently looking into) but shift patterns make it very hard to predict childcare needs.

I feel my taxes should be spent on children & future generations. I also don't believe as a tax payer I should shoulder all the burden, older people should have to sell their homes to fund their care if they have not made provisions for them. Look at the outcry over means tested BBC license!!!!
It annoys me that I have paid my NI since I was 17 & throughout uni & maternity leaves & I will likely have to pay for the NHS in the future & not receive a state pension (i'm in my 30s).

@MilkTrayLimeBarrel the government should help people who need help. it should also help people who want to pay taxes to stay in work.

How about the free childcare they get at birth. oh ffs how much more goady can you get? For either dh or I to quit and be 'free' childcare the cost would be 4 years at annual salaries of 26k a year (as an example, sure many others will have many more) for us at least childcare is cheaper than this- especially with the 20% tfc which has made a huge difference to 0ur lives. Even without It ds needed to be in nursery to enable us to may our mortgage/bills/feed the 3 of us. So, for us, the tax free childcare knocking over £100 a month off our Bill has made a very welcome difference.

If everyone in my office who pays for childcare quit to stay at home we would go from a 19 employee company to 6. Most of the staff work full time and pay tax on gold salaries. Why should they all quit and lose good incomes to be 'free' childcare?

I’m sorry but to claim that a family of 2 parents working full time are as disadvantaged as children in care or families fleeing domestic violence then you’re deluded. It’s not just financially deprived of music classes as a baby but how being raised in poverty isn’t the babies fault and if we can’t prioritise those families then we’ve failed.

Yes we need to make work and parenting better and easier and less crippling for everyone, but you don’t it by taking away a small thing of benefit to a family that really need it.

I’m sorry but to claim that a family of 2 parents working full time are as disadvantaged as children in care or families fleeing domestic violence then you’re deluded

If thats aimed at me thats not at all what i said.

I find it a bit annoying that people think everything should be subsidised anymore.
Before I got pregnant I made sure I'd saved up enough money to cover my maternity leave and my first year of childcare.

Having children is a lifestyle choice you make, you know childcare costs are high 🤷‍♀️ living in a part of the country where accommodation costs half your joint salary is also a lifestyle choice 🤷‍♀️.

The government should be funding the ill; disabled; and vulnerable. Not people's lifestyle choices.

blah a lot of people cant afford to save circa £24000 per child!

I dont believe that means people shouldnt have them though.

@holiday I’d need to go back and check but someone on a previous page said families with 2 working parents can be as disadvantaged as though who are getting the free hours aged 2 - hence my reply.

holiday

Most people can't afford to save 24k before having a child, but in fairness they would make different choices to blah Maybe they'd choose both parents working, one ft and one pt, tc/cb, etc.

The government should be funding the ill; disabled; and vulnerable. Not people's lifestyle choices.

What about when your lifestyle choices make you ill?

@holidayhelpppp

Why should we pay for you to use hospitals and gps sherbert?

Because those are vital services whereas children are an optional lifestyle choice... like having a pet dog or an expensive hobby! I would never begrudge my taxes being spent on the medical care of others (or other essential services) but I do resent paying for people’s decision to have children.

Having children is a lifestyle choice you make, you know childcare costs are high 🤷‍♀️ living in a part of the country where accommodation costs half your joint salary is also a lifestyle choice

This attitude really annoys me. I can't help that I was born in London & I have a sick family member I want to stay near too. Plus me selling up & moving just pushes prices up where I move too & places pressures on services in that location.

I'm pretty sure my parents generation used to get some form of child benefit & it was not means tested.

There are many people who would like to have continued to work after having dc, but they couldn't afford it, there is so much help available now
There’s help available if your family has an extremely low income or is unemployed. There isn’t help available if you earn over the threshold (which isn’t much).

My DH earns over the threshold, but childcare would exceed my earnings so I’m stuck at home. If I returned to work we’d make a loss, and that loss would push us into the red. There’s no help available for me to return to work because DH earns too much. So I’m locked out of the workforce, no pension, paying no tax, reducing my future earnings and my chances of ever getting another job. This is the reality for families living on the borderline where they don’t earn a lot but they simultaneously earn “too much”.