3 ms·

If child care is so expensive, wouldn't the income loss of one parent staying at home be irrelevant? Plus, the parent could find some simple side gigs that fit

by yters 7y ago

If child care is so expensive, wouldn't the income loss of one parent staying at home be irrelevant? Plus, the parent could find some simple side gigs that fit into at home childcare, or even do paid childcare themselves. I think the real problem is people don't like taking care of kids, and would rather have a stranger do the job. Understandable since kids are noisy, disobedient, stinky little things, but we were all that at some point (probably still are) and someone took care of us. Then there are all the single parent families, but why are there so many single parent families? Again, I think it is because people aren't willing to put up with each other's imperfections. Yes, sometimes there is real abuse going on that means staying together is actual a danger to life. But, is that the majority of cases? I am doubtful. So, the real reason child care is so expensive is because we aren't willing to suck up and stick out with the imperfections of other human beings without a paycheck.

mc3 7y ago
> Parent could find some simple side gigs Highly unlikely! Maybe for a 4 year old there could be some time during the day. Let's say 1 hour. The type of gig where you can do an hour of work and be paid for it ... won't pay much. Let's say $20. It is hardly worth it. Now compare that to being at work. > I think the real problem is people don't like taking care of kids, and would rather have a stranger do the job. I don't think so. Taking care of your own kids is much more rewarding than going to work. If work is better it's because the job is great, not because the kids are annoying. Staying at home looking after kids is a lot easier. If you work you have a limited window to get them ready for care, it's a rush, then you have to commute to work, rush back to childcare after work, and then take them home and get them ready super quick for bed. It is not ideal, and not really a choice based on laziness. > Understandable since kids are noisy, disobedient, stinky little things. Ok..... That's one way to characterize them I guess. Seems a bit harsh. > So, the real reason child care is so expensive is because we aren't willing to suck up and stick out with the imperfections of other human beings without a paycheck. The real reason is it takes a lot of labour to look after the kids, administer the centre, cook, and also real estate and maintenance of property etc. And people pay for it because they need to work to afford to raise kids.
- yters 7y ago
  Not so. Child care costs is artificial. In Texas child care was quite cheap. In Maryland costs are extraordinary. People know the demand is there, because there are a whole bunch of type A career minded people who want to climb the corporate ladder rather than look after their little food grubbers. Plus, legislation that forces corporations and government to pay for childcare just makes it all even more expensive, as always happens when you dump public money on some issue. Also, I suspect the modern feminism that denigrates women unless they have a corporate career is also to blame. Women just have a better instinct for taking care of children than men, and modern culture has told they are worthless if they are a stay at home mom. So neither the male nor female in a modern upwardly mobile marriage want to stay at home with the kids. Thus, they want to stick the kid (usually just one nowadays) in childcare. And finally, why do people think raising kids is so expensive? It is because of a bunch of extra BS that is unnecessary. They think they need to stick their kid in every program and every possibility of advancement so they can secure a few special spot at top colleges for a few jobs requiring extra special degrees. Meanwhile, such jobs are outsourced, automated, or plain made irrelevant, at the same time there are many blue collar jobs that pay very decently (especially minus college debt) for the taking. Or, if college is truly important, the kid can work their way through, start at community college, get scholarships, join ROTC, etc. All of these problems are of our own making due to our own expectations, not due to the reality of what it takes to raise successful kids.
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    I think you are mixing a bunch of unrelated stuff together in some kind of attempt to bash "modern feminism" I can agree there is a lot of societal pressure to enroll your little kiddo into a bagillion silly programs and stuff, but that hardly has anything to do with childcare costs or feminism.
    - yters 7y ago
      The logic is both parents have to work to afford kids. Why do people think this is true?
- 7y ago
usaar333 7y ago
> If child care is so expensive, wouldn't the income loss of one parent staying at home be irrelevant Well, no. You might still come out ahead even if childcare consumes 60% of the lower earners' after tax income. Also, the big issue is what to do once the kids don't need such heavy parental attention. Sucks to have lost all your work skills. Also can lead to problematic power dynamics in the relationship.
- yters 7y ago
  There is much more to life than a corporate career. I would love to be the stay at home dad with zero corporate skills myself. Again this perspective is due to our own weird societal perspective.

by yters 7y ago

mc3 7y ago

> Parent could find some simple side gigs Highly unlikely! Maybe for a 4 year old there could be some time during the day. Let's say 1 hour. The type of gig where you can do an hour of work and be paid for it ... won't pay much. Let's say $20. It is hardly worth it. Now compare that to being at work. > I think the real problem is people don't like taking care of kids, and would rather have a stranger do the job. I don't think so. Taking care of your own kids is much more rewarding than going to work. If work is better it's because the job is great, not because the kids are annoying. Staying at home looking after kids is a lot easier. If you work you have a limited window to get them ready for care, it's a rush, then you have to commute to work, rush back to childcare after work, and then take them home and get them ready super quick for bed. It is not ideal, and not really a choice based on laziness. > Understandable since kids are noisy, disobedient, stinky little things. Ok..... That's one way to characterize them I guess. Seems a bit harsh. > So, the real reason child care is so expensive is because we aren't willing to suck up and stick out with the imperfections of other human beings without a paycheck. The real reason is it takes a lot of labour to look after the kids, administer the centre, cook, and also real estate and maintenance of property etc. And people pay for it because they need to work to afford to raise kids.

yters 7y ago
Not so. Child care costs is artificial. In Texas child care was quite cheap. In Maryland costs are extraordinary. People know the demand is there, because there are a whole bunch of type A career minded people who want to climb the corporate ladder rather than look after their little food grubbers. Plus, legislation that forces corporations and government to pay for childcare just makes it all even more expensive, as always happens when you dump public money on some issue. Also, I suspect the modern feminism that denigrates women unless they have a corporate career is also to blame. Women just have a better instinct for taking care of children than men, and modern culture has told they are worthless if they are a stay at home mom. So neither the male nor female in a modern upwardly mobile marriage want to stay at home with the kids. Thus, they want to stick the kid (usually just one nowadays) in childcare. And finally, why do people think raising kids is so expensive? It is because of a bunch of extra BS that is unnecessary. They think they need to stick their kid in every program and every possibility of advancement so they can secure a few special spot at top colleges for a few jobs requiring extra special degrees. Meanwhile, such jobs are outsourced, automated, or plain made irrelevant, at the same time there are many blue collar jobs that pay very decently (especially minus college debt) for the taking. Or, if college is truly important, the kid can work their way through, start at community college, get scholarships, join ROTC, etc. All of these problems are of our own making due to our own expectations, not due to the reality of what it takes to raise successful kids.
- spookthesunset 7y ago
  I think you are mixing a bunch of unrelated stuff together in some kind of attempt to bash "modern feminism" I can agree there is a lot of societal pressure to enroll your little kiddo into a bagillion silly programs and stuff, but that hardly has anything to do with childcare costs or feminism.
  - yters 7y ago
    The logic is both parents have to work to afford kids. Why do people think this is true?
7y ago

usaar333 7y ago

> If child care is so expensive, wouldn't the income loss of one parent staying at home be irrelevant Well, no. You might still come out ahead even if childcare consumes 60% of the lower earners' after tax income. Also, the big issue is what to do once the kids don't need such heavy parental attention. Sucks to have lost all your work skills. Also can lead to problematic power dynamics in the relationship.

yters 7y ago
There is much more to life than a corporate career. I would love to be the stay at home dad with zero corporate skills myself. Again this perspective is due to our own weird societal perspective.