Page 8 | Does everyone think childcare should be paid for?

Cococomellon · 2023-01-01T16:43:19+00:00

I have seen a lot of posts in social media about the cost of childcare, that it should be free and all the reasons in favour of that such as allowing both parents to work and the impact on the economy. I can see how this would be a benefit. I have a young child and pay for childcare but I planned for this and it is not a surprise to me. Who pays for this "free" childcare? Is there spare money the government has squirrelled somewhere? Should we all pay more taxes? Will the nhs get even less funding? Schools? Perhaps I am just very right wing as I don't see to see the counter- arguments but I'm sure many people (some who don't have children) don't want to pay for others children to go to nursery?

PurBal · 01/01/2023 19:54

3 day a week childcare for two is double our mortgage. Our mortgage was based on the affordability of both our full time incomes. We earn around the same (this is important because friends who have a higher earning DH don’t have the same considerations if they choose to give up work). And we earn above the universal credit threshold. Either one of us work part time and we take home less than £50 per week after paying for childcare or one of us gives up work. Either way we have to pay our mortgage (and bills etc) on half the income our mortgage is based on. Whilst I knew this was the case, the reality is much harder than expected especially with the the cost of living increases. Our childcare bill has increased more than 10% in six months. No, I don’t expect anyone to pay for my kids and one of us will take a career break if needed. But it really is a second mortgage.

Nirvanarama · 01/01/2023 19:56

Alfiexx1 · 01/01/2023 19:44

Well a decent life, being able to travel, school trips, clubs, not depriving your children of experiences due to costs.

Unfortunately many people have children and just get by, those are the children who often then struggle throughout life, with poor prospects.

Children should be able to thrive, not simply survive. And unfortunately those not able to afford childcare often can’t do that.

Show quote history

I think I just reached peak Mumsnet. My kids are happy, fed, clothed and loved. They have prospects for fucks sake.

NearlyMidnight · 01/01/2023 20:00

I agree that work places should provide heavily subsidised child care places - along with access to private GP services. I also think work should be more flexible. Work has to the default. Everyone contributes something - even if only one or two days a week. So everyone has a stake.

Alfiexx1 · 01/01/2023 20:08

Nirvanarama · 01/01/2023 19:56

I think I just reached peak Mumsnet. My kids are happy, fed, clothed and loved. They have prospects for fucks sake.

Show quote history

You’re providing the basics, most should want to provide more than just enough to survive.

Children who are exposed to new things, travel, clubs etc. are proven to do better in general than those who are not able to engage in these activities.

This is what’s meant by not having kids if you can’t afford childcare, as if you can’t even afford that, how will you cope later when they want to do more?

SlagathaChristie · 01/01/2023 20:10

If there is to be further state intervention/subsidies for child-rearing, I'd rather it went towards enabling families to have a parent at home (or working fewer hours). The marriage tax allowance is pitiful really, that could be more generous.

I'd rather be able to afford to have more involvement in raising my child than have "free" childcare.

fUNNYfACE36 · 01/01/2023 20:12

No why should I pat for other people's kids when I've already paid fir 4 of my own?

chavbagornot · 01/01/2023 20:13

SlagathaChristie · 01/01/2023 20:10

If there is to be further state intervention/subsidies for child-rearing, I'd rather it went towards enabling families to have a parent at home (or working fewer hours). The marriage tax allowance is pitiful really, that could be more generous.

I'd rather be able to afford to have more involvement in raising my child than have "free" childcare.

This is a precisely the issue - people don't want to work a lot of the time

Judgyjudgy · 01/01/2023 20:14

I don't think anything should be free, but it could certainly be subsidised so it is cheaper. I'd rather taxes were spent on people who worked and had children, than people who didn't

MarshaMelrose · 01/01/2023 20:15

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 19:28

🤣🤣🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

Read a book about economics, please.

Show quote history

Can you explain it for me? I'm a bit of a dummy about these things. 🙂

jannier · 01/01/2023 20:15

Yaslana · 01/01/2023 19:52

If you're working full time then you should be able to pay towards your own childcare? Its subsidised and is short term

Show quote history

Of course but with wages for professions like nursing being so low many use food banks the 30 hours or 22 stretched is massive help...but if you do not need 30 or 22 stretched why should you get more than you need.....you seem to think everyone working full time earns enough they don't.

Nirvanarama · 01/01/2023 20:16

You make it sound like you're either middle class or floating around in some grim ghetto doomed to a life of benefits and food banks.

We can afford the school clubs and the trips and we holiday once a year in the UK. We still can't afford childcare for our youngest, pluss wrap around for the eldest and holiday clubs outside of term time for both. HTH.

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 20:18

felulageller · 01/01/2023 19:34

It's crazy economics that we don't do this.

No wonder our economy is failing.

We spend billions educating women only to have the 80% who have DC's to suffer detriment in the workplace, underemployment, discrimination, poverty, social exclusion, homelessness, etc etc because of the barrier of a lack of free community controlled childcare available to all mothers as and when needed.

It's such a massive waste of resources and potential. Underemployment of mothers costs us all billions every year.

The only reason for not doing it is misogyny.

Yep

tiggergoesbounce · 01/01/2023 20:19

SlagathaChristie · 01/01/2023 20:10

If there is to be further state intervention/subsidies for child-rearing, I'd rather it went towards enabling families to have a parent at home (or working fewer hours). The marriage tax allowance is pitiful really, that could be more generous.

I'd rather be able to afford to have more involvement in raising my child than have "free" childcare.

I agree with this.
Surely the best way is to work it is where parents who do want more involvement in raising their kids have access to better working hours or working conditions which means subsidised or wrap around childcare isnt the only option for some.

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 20:20

yellowspanner · 01/01/2023 19:38

I don't agree with free childcare. It's not free. Taxpayers would be paying for it.

I'll repeat it again, very slowly.

It

has

been

shown

to

more

than

pay

for

itself.

Hummusanddipdip · 01/01/2023 20:22

This is one of those things that always divides opinions drastically.

Ds has always only done 2 days a week at nursery. The monthly cost before his funding kicked in was almost half my wages. But when you broke it down, we paid between £5 and £6 an hour depending on his age (baby, toddler and preschool ages vary on charge). I think that cost is unreasonably low, and I believe providers should be paid more, however when you weigh it up against all your other bills, it's a big cost that's nice not to pay.

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 20:23

Can you explain it for me? I'm a bit of a dummy about these things. 🙂

Already did in my earlier post.

Reugny · 01/01/2023 20:24

Hbh17 · 01/01/2023 19:15

Many people have no/fewer children because they know they can't afford it. Some of us are happily childfree. Why should both of those groups have to keep subsidising the less responsible who think it's OK to have as many children as they like because they expect the state (ie taxpayers) to fund them?
Children are the responsibility of their parents, and that includes financial responsibility.

If you have met some of the parents and offspring I've met you would want them in good childcare for 50 hours per week as you would realise it's cheaper than dealing with what they become as adults.

tiggergoesbounce · 01/01/2023 20:26

@TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon

Sorry if you have already posted a link, but i couldn't see one that i could read later.

I was interested to see what figures they worked it out on.

MarshaMelrose · 01/01/2023 20:27

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 20:23

Can you explain it for me? I'm a bit of a dummy about these things. 🙂

Already did in my earlier post.

OK. Thanks. I'll go back and look.

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 20:28

tiggergoesbounce · 01/01/2023 20:26

@TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon

Sorry if you have already posted a link, but i couldn't see one that i could read later.

I was interested to see what figures they worked it out on.

A ton of data over many, many years from all over OECD countries.

Patapouf · 01/01/2023 20:29

Some really weird responses on here for a parenting site 🤔

Yes the government should properly subside childcare. Not because it's enabling parents to shirk their responsibilities but because of the benefits it would bring to society.

Newmum738 · 01/01/2023 20:30

felulageller · 01/01/2023 19:34

It's crazy economics that we don't do this.

No wonder our economy is failing.

We spend billions educating women only to have the 80% who have DC's to suffer detriment in the workplace, underemployment, discrimination, poverty, social exclusion, homelessness, etc etc because of the barrier of a lack of free community controlled childcare available to all mothers as and when needed.

It's such a massive waste of resources and potential. Underemployment of mothers costs us all billions every year.

The only reason for not doing it is misogyny.

This! We spend all that money educating girls only for them to work in low skilled part time jobs because they can't afford childcare and employers won't be flexible.

jannier · 01/01/2023 20:30

Alfiexx1 · 01/01/2023 19:24

It’s typical round here, actually one of the lower cost ones available in the local area.

Show quote history

But if I could afford to live in a different part of my borough and pay 4 times the mortgage my nursery would be 4 times the price because it pays 4 times the rent.....so it's relative to where you choose to live as well. I always advise looking along the commute or just outside an area to see if prices are better.

Reugny · 01/01/2023 20:32

fUNNYfACE36 · 01/01/2023 20:12

No why should I pat for other people's kids when I've already paid fir 4 of my own?

You need more than your 4 to have a functioning society.

MarshaMelrose · 01/01/2023 20:33

TheGirlWhoTamedTheDragon · 01/01/2023 18:54

The countries that make childcare free ir very heavily subsidised (max a couple of hundred pounds per month) i.e. most of our comparable European neighbours plus some others do not do so out of altruism. They do so because it's been proved by the data to be beneficial for society as a whole.

It increases tax revenue and productivity. In reduces inequality. It stops the waste of many women's skills and aids their career progression, which then leads to more women later in life in senior positions and it's also been proved that companies with Boards with a mix of men and women in executive positions produce more profit and are more stable than those with men dominating, therefore greater ecomonic stability and more tax take. Higher productivity. Less stress on marriages so lower divorce rates, lower gender paygap, better example set to children, etc etc.

It's a no brainer basically and pays for itself many times over. That is why sensible countries subsidise it almost entirely/ fully cover the cost. The reason this doesn't happen in the UK is the same reason we have the lowest productivity in the G7, the reason we had Brexit, the reason the NHS and education are collapsing, the reason our infrastructure is falling apart and the reason that there were no plans in place for food and energy security: no long-term planning from successive Governments, and an electorate that doesn't demand it or hold them to account for not doing it.

It increases tax revenue

Is this your post that explains that it wouldn't cost the govt more to pay for the childcare than they'd receive in tax? Or is there another post?