To think we should be protesting

[Jessieabs]

For affordable childcare.

Why are we letting the government get away with the absolute joke that is childcare in the U.K.

Over 2k per month to send 2 kids to nursery seems like madness! There should absolutely be reform to this crazy state that we’re in. Surely a huge majority of the voting population have children/have grandchildren or plan to have children, but this issue is rarely talked about at election time!

mmersivereader

I'd be curious how many of the 'why should I pay for your family' posters expect taxpayers to fund their parents' social
care.

^

This. Cradle to grave. If it was £50 per day, per adult for care for the elderly there would soon be a turnaround in the law.“

It’s an awful lot more than £50 per day. Hundreds of thousands of people pay it, without assistance of any sort.

why should I pay for your family' posters expect taxpayers to fund their parents' social
care.

In my opinion (minus obvious examples of disability/unplanned events)

You have a child, you raise the child, go to work when they’re at school or have free nursery hours.
You care for your parents when they reach a point where they need it.

Western culture is so bizarre. Have kids to have someone else raise them, send parents off to care homes or pay for carers. Moan about how hard life is. If families actually came together to help each other everyone would be a lot better off.

@Hopeisnotastrategy

Previous generation did not get any assistance with child care at all. You are bloody lucky with all the breaks you get in that regard,

This. I got no help whatsoever- except child benefit. Previous generation got child benefit for 1 child only. You already have waaaay more than previous generations yet you want more? Who do you think will pay for it? Oh yes, the 'baby boomers' who are still expected to work until 67, who all voted for the car crash of Brexit and who's fault it is when covid hit that schools closed to protect them, despite them having lived their lives already? Bitter at being blamed for everything but still expected to pay for someone else child care? Moi?

clementinapples

If I'd followed the way you suggest, I would have:
Worked for 7 years to build my career.
Not worked for 6 years, due to raising my children.
Tried to find a job, after 6 years out or possibly a job that allowed me to work 930 to 230 (not likely in my job).
Worked for 6 years.
Stopped work, or gone even more part time to look after parent with dementia.

No. Fuck that life. Unpaid carer, punctuated by struggling to get back into work in the middle? No. It's not 'families coming together' in that case, it's the woman sacrificing her own needs for others.

@Clementineapples

*why should I pay for your family' posters expect taxpayers to fund their parents' social care.*

In my opinion (minus obvious examples of disability/unplanned events)

You have a child, you raise the child, go to work when they’re at school or have free nursery hours.
You care for your parents when they reach a point where they need it.

Western culture is so bizarre. Have kids to have someone else raise them, send parents off to care homes or pay for carers. Moan about how hard life is. If families actually came together to help each other everyone would be a lot better off.

@Clementineapples does this comment apply only to mums ? Or should mum and dads stop working as well!? So they can take care of the child and their elderly parents ? So … who pays in the meantime for the food of these people ?

@immersivereader

I'd be curious how many of the 'why should I pay for your family' posters expect taxpayers to fund their parents' social care.

^

This. Cradle to grave. If it was £50 per day, per adult for care for the elderly there would soon be a turnaround in the law.

Haha ok let's take this example of these neighbours living next to each other:

House A = 2 working adults married with 2 children
House B = 1 single child free person

Council tax from which social care comes from at the moment (until new tax next yr) is £100 per month per household

house B gets 25% single person discount so only pays £75 per month per person

House A pay £50 per month per person

Do you see the inequality here? Single adult pays more in council tax deapite a discount than a household with 2 working adults in it. So once again the single person ends up paying more for social care than 2 adult household.

And you wonder why single childfree people are pissed off when they are asked to continue to stump up more.

@Dreamstate once again you bring the childfree story. And tbh your example has nothing to do with children.

House A has got 2 adults who pay for council tax that’s why they paid £50 each. If house A was a single parent with two children they would be paying the same council tax as you.

Your solution would be to live with another adult if you want a council tax discount. Having children has nothing to do in this scenario.

Council tax discount > I meant if you wanted to pay £50 like your house A example

[quote EasterIssland]@Dreamstate once again you bring the childfree story. And tbh your example has nothing to do with children.

House A has got 2 adults who pay for council tax that’s why they paid £50 each. If house A was a single parent with two children they would be paying the same council tax as you.

Your solution would be to live with another adult if you want a council tax discount. Having children has nothing to do in this scenario.[/quote]
Because I'm responding to another persons post that peolle who loan about paying taxes etc.

And dont be so stupid, a single person shouldn't feel forced to live with another adult in a house share or just marry someone so they pay less tax as your implying.

I am staggered at the reaction here!

We bring up girls to do well at school, go to uni, have a careers and then say ‘oh by the way, that career we encouraged you to get, you have to give it up to be an unpaid carer as the government can’t see the benefit in subsidising childcare’. It’s insane!!! Totally insane!!!

It’s not about people having to subsidise other peoples childcare, it’s about keeping women in well paid, hard fought for, tax paying careers. It’s about people not having to be ‘wealthy enough’ to have kids.

Childcare costs are SCANDALOUS in this country. Utterly scandalous! Look around you at the rest of Europe, to countries which truly value women (because we are talking women’s work here) in the workplace, the economic benefit their years of hard study brings, and don’t just force them to give all of their efforts up if they don’t earn enough to cover £1,000 per child after tax every month.

The ‘don’t have them if you can’t afford them’ argument is grim, really grim. So two teachers living in London (cause London schools need teachers) can’t have kids? (Sorry, you can’t afford them). What sort of inhumane society things this is ok?

Uk childcare costs are the highest in the EU, and 3 times higher than the EU average. See page 15 on this OECD report for graphs
www.oecd.org/els/soc/benefits-and-wages/Net%20childcare%20costs%20in%20EU%20countries_2019.pdf. But this is ok as grumpy child-free women don’t see this as important.

@stillcrazyafterall This is such a damaging mentality. One of the biggest things holding women back in this country is other women saying "well I never got that break so why should you?". It's toxic, quite frankly. Imagine if we said that about other advances in women's rights.

IF the older generation of women and mothers had been supported better - how would their life be different now? Would it be better? As women we should be raising each other up, not tearing each other down.

I'm so shocked by pp on here.

Women have come so so far in education, work, etc. and yet you want them to give it all up to raise the next generation? Or men (seeing as childcare support would also benefit them)?! And for people comparing kids to handbags...  you do realise any country NEEDS children to survive? Can you imagine what the government would do (any government) if we just stopped having children?!

The fact is that subsiding childcare further is better for the economy as it keeps (unfortunately, mainly) women in work - if they want to be, paying taxes. In modern day society the vast majority of people cannot afford to live on one salary alone. More disposable income means more spending = better economy. It's why other European countries do SO MUCH BETTER than us on childcare.

@AntiMaskersAreTwats

Maybe spend a bit of time with them and don’t send them into nursery for such long days every day

Seriously?! Two comments it took to get to this shittiness. 🙄😒

My childcare costs are £2k per month. My mortgage is more, though. My family live over 150 miles away and I'm a lone parent. What exactly do you propose I do with my kids while I work to keep a roof over all of our heads?

Yeah, I'm a crap parent for "choosing" to send them to nursery so that I can work to pay for their home, food, shoes etc.

Fuck off with the preachy shit trying to make mums in much harder situations than you feel like shit for doing twice what you have to do.

@HeartsAndClubs

Sorry, hang on a minute to everyone who is saying ‘why should I pay for your choices’. You don’t, I pay for my choices by paying 40% income tax. and others who don’t have children who pay income tax also pay for your choices.

Tax goes into the system, you don’t get to pick and choose what it’s spent on. or maybe those demanding childcare should give up something in order to be granted cheap childcare. After all, if you receive childcare then what do I who has no children receive instead?

Nope. Unless they are high earners, most people paying basic rate tax don't pay even for the cost of the services they personally receive over their lifetimes.

Higher rate taxpayers are subbing everyone else.

So to have a go at someone paying higher rate tax who is a net contributer when it sounds like you are not, is ansurd and makes you look very ill-educated.

Why do people have a child or more than one child if they're aware affording their care is going to put a huge strain on them? Just because people can have children doesn't mean they should.

@Jessieabs

I mean the government should further subsidise childcare.

Also when people say ‘one parent should stay at home’ we all know that most of the time that’ll be the woman sacrificing their career.

Genuinely surprised in some people’s opinions on this.

Yes I completely agree. I lived for a while in some Scandinavian countries where childcare is roughly about 1/5 of what I pay in the U.K. and of a very high quality. There's a definite feeling there that the government are there to improve the lives of the people and the idea that childcare is essentially the equivalent of one person's income is seen as ridiculous and bad for the economy in that it makes it harder for people to see the benefit of returning to work.

@Hopeisnotastrategy

Previous generation did not get any assistance with child care at all. You are bloody lucky with all the breaks you get in that regard,

Previous generations lived in an area where a family of four could easily be supported on one very average income.

Child minding is already incredibly badly paid. What aßrr you suggesting? The tax payers pay? Or the owner/employees reduce costs?

Another one appalled by the "don't have kids if you can't afford them" comments.

Of course i am going to bring up scandinavia. I live here. Childcare is effectively free here. No kids go hungry because food is provided at daycare and school.

But you know what the kicker is? GDP is higher here per head of population than in the uk (and that is without "encouraging" foreign billionaires to "live" here thus artifically inflating GDP).

I think having 99% of women able to go back to work after having kids actually helps the economy.

The argument that childless tax payers pay for others' kids is wrong. (Although these begrudgers don't seem to mind that childless people paid for their education and health care.)

@Dreamstate you’re the one making the stupid comparison. In your comparison the kids don’t have any effect in the tax discount. It’s the adults living within the same household

It is a tricky one, but all care in this country is expensive. Look at nursing homes, they on average cost £1000.00 a month. The cost of childcare is the reason I have a 4.5 year gap between my children, not exactly what I wanted but we couldn't afford 2 in childcare at the same time. It's also the reason I went part time, as financially it made more sense. Both at school now but I remain part time, as you will soon find out OP wrap around care and holiday clubs are also very expensive.

"I mean the government should further subsidise childcare."

Why should the taxpayer pay for your children's care??!!

@HeartsAndClubs what about us? We had two at once. One was unplanned.

@P0ntiacBandit

"I mean the government should further subsidise childcare."

Why should the taxpayer pay for your children's care??!!

Because the idea of a government is to use taxes to improve the lives of people living in that country. I'm fairly zero waste and live walking distance from the rubbish tip so I don't need my bins emptied but I don't begrudge the bit of tax that pays for refuse collection. I've never needed to services of a fire engine but I don't begrudge paying for the fire service either.

The idea that tax payers are paying for someone's life choices is ridiculous. It would be utilising tax to further benefit the economy by ensuring it was as easy as possible for people to return to work. Other countries look at the U.K. and their crippilingly high childcare costs the way we look to America and their flawed healthcare system.

And the don't have kids if you can't afford them is a disgusting thing to say. If society is so flawed that only families with a high earner can afford to have both parents in work then that's clearly a problem that won't be fixed by people having less children.