Subsidised childcare va care home fees

[MrBanana]

Discussing the introduction of 15 free hours for two year olds with friends (which I think is flawed but that’s not the point of this post). Friend 1 said childcare has to be made free. I disagree, there’s no political appetite for that. People of retirement age feel quite strongly that parents should be responsible for their own children. They’re the ones who vote in the largest numbers.

I don’t disagree, but I don’t agree that we somehow have it easier. We are told we have to be responsible for our own children. But we can’t now survive on one salary alone. Childcare is now more expensive and inadequately funded. Everyone I know with a two year old has seen their nursery bill increase in anticipation of the “free hours”
to compensate for it.

But then it struck me that these people are the same people who have “worked all their life” and don’t feel they should have to pay their care home fees and if they do, complain about it being unfair. Healthcare is still free to them, whereas we are finding it increasingly difficult to get a dentist for example.

It just struck me how hypocritical the whole argument is - we are supposed to be responsible for our children, by virtue of them being our children, whilst simultaneously working. But the current cohort of retirement age are complaining about, and want to avoid, being financially responsible for themselves! Most won’t have been paying taxes whilst receiving the benefits we’re now paying for childcare/dentistry etc.

Im not sure that’s the best structured argument but I hope I've made my point well enough to be understood.

I'm 70 soon and I fail to see how we had it easier

As an individual you may not have but statistically across generations things have changed. 🤦🏻‍♀️

it’s also not really about care home costs but care in the home & wondering how the NHS will cope & the cost of pensions.

The women were bringing up their families in the 50s will mostly be deceased by now (or over 90), the vast majority of today’s pensioners brought their children up in the 80s and 90s and most of them worked.

Most of today’s pensioners worked whilst raising a family (in the 1980s and 90s)

Define most?

“Over the past 40 years, the UK has seen an almost continual rise in the proportion of women in employment. The employment rate among women of ‘prime working age’ (aged 25-54) is up from 57% in 1975 to a record high of 78% in 2017”

”This predominantly reflects an increase in full-time employment, from 29% in 1985 (when data on hours of work began) to 44% in 2017”

”These aggregate changes are largely the result of a huge change in working patterns at particular points in the life cycle, with far more women in employment over the course of their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s”

Those that are most likely to require care homes are the same ones bringing up their families in the 50s and 60s.

This is quite a silly argument, you don't need to pit the needs of older people and the needs of children/working parents against each other in this way.

Older generations got cheaper houses and better pensions, maybe, but they also got to die of cancer in higher numbers, have more of their children die and so on. Some things have got better even if financially they're worse for younger people. And you can't exactly just choose to be born at a different time so you're stuck with your own generation's experience anyway, whether you feel terrible pangs of guilt at having bought a house for 50p or not.

Sensible measures to address the situation should include something to bring down housing costs and a way to target the unearned wealth of well-off pensioners, but not totally taking the whole pot.

You could also do lots of positive things like initiatives to help people stay healthy and independent for longer into old age, eg by eating well, getting out and socialising. Older people quite often become sedentary and need a lot more help as a result. (Not blaming them but it's not something anyone does anything about either!)

Stats are good!

Female workforce participation in 1971 was around 52%. It didn't increase too much in the 70s, by 1981 it was around 55%. Bigger shift into the 90s, 1991 was at 63%, and around 72% today.

Anyone in their 80s and 90s today would have been of working age in 1971 and 1981; the oldest of them might not have been in their prime childrearing years but the PP's point was about economic contribution.

Male workforce participation has gone from over 90% to 79% over the same period. So yep, most people worked.

And as for all the 'worked all their lives' talk - it's really a weird line of argument, probably a certain proportion of any generation are lazy layabouts, so what? It's harder to not work now than it used to be in the past when you could get the dole by just signing on, rather than jumping through endless hoops.

Childcare and care home fees aren’t comparable at all. Having children is a choice whereas needing a care home isn’t. Besides, lots of people do have to pay for their own care home fees. Only those that can’t have it paid for by the state.

I don’t think there is any benefit in people with stage 7 dementia being kept alive for years, although many are, bedridden, double incontinent and in god knows what state of anxiety, disorientation and fear, not to mention physical pain which can’t be communicated. It’s close to torture. Being asked when you are younger if you consent to euthanasia at stage 7 dementia would be kinder and free up space to people in the early stages who need help. Unfortunately when it comes to euthanasia sensible conversation is being drowned out by faith leaders and Paralympic medalists.

Had the pension age remained at 60 for women, then I would hazard a guess more grandmother's would do the bulk of childcare thus easing life for young and old whilst easing the need for expensive childcare.
It would be cheaper for the government to pay retirement pensions as a way to back up the ability for younger people to pursue a career or bring in a needed second wage

Older people make up a more significant proportion of voters:-

younger people are less likely to to vote than older people, and turnout rises as people get older.

https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/age-and-voting-behaviour-at-the-2019-general-election/

which means policy is driven by their interests. So there most definitely is a relationship between the self serving interests of the older generation and the political landscape. Hence, my OP where I mentioned that there isn’t the political appetite to subsidise childcare. Anecdotally I believe that is because the typical voter thinks that investment would detract from their own needs.

This post nicely summarises the issues I raised around children being seen as individual choice/responsibility rather than also recognising societal benefits...

Most in that more were working than not working.

@JassyRadlett great post

Except it is to a degree

Many lifestyle factors impact whether someone needs care in later life

And more morbidly, people can make tough choices to not need a care home

The same tough choices people have when finding out they’re pregnant

Only those that can’t have it paid for by the state.

These people still contribute all but £25 per week towards their come home fees.

It’s not the same - there are LESS SAHP’s now!

I actually think that more people from my generation will have worked for more years than the younger generations. Very few went into further education.
Back in the 70s the majority of people left school at 16 and then straight to work. Those people will have been paying taxes for 50+ years !! Most definitely will have made their fair share of contributions!

And the point of my OP. This is exactly the sort of hypocrisy I was talking about.

Although it hasn't stopped the intergenerational bickering I see... 😭

Because there is more free childcare 😂

There is not more free childcare. Childcare is less accessible and more expensive and it is getting worse…!

I have linked some stats evidencing this.

I think hypocrisy is harsh, tbh. This is how this society has framed having children for generations. So many of our debates are skewed by this framing, but at this point it's a common shared viewpoint.

It affects many things - not just discourse on childcare, or care homes, or the triple lock. It's the indirect consequences. When from 1973 to today did any political leader stand up and say "hey, you know, are you guys cool that we're going to need loads of immigration to keep the economy afloat if the birth rate keeps going like this?"

Those of us over 50 got very little help - 12.5 hours of preschool for the year before school, a little older than me got no help at all - I can see where resentment can build up, especially when I see the young families I work with jetting off for two holidays a year, still getting subsidised childcare effectively. The reality is that the lobby that shout the loudest gets the help - and those with disabilities are forgotten as usual - no extra help for families who can't use childcare (you should be as a bare minimum be able to transfer your personal tax allowance if you don't work due to being a carer, of the old middle or young in my opinion)