4 ms·
It’s genuinely not legislation. Labor is expensive, which combined with the reality that anything beyond a 4:1 child-caretaker ratio is pretty bad for children
by Analemma_ 4y ago
It’s genuinely not legislation. Labor is expensive, which combined with the reality that anything beyond a 4:1 child-caretaker ratio is pretty bad for children pretty much guarantees that child care can never be cheap in a rich country with rich country labor costs.
EDIT: I should've said "infants" and not "children" here, where the necessity of a 4:1 ratio really applies. As children get older this ratio can get higher.
I recommend https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/the-iron-mathematics-of-day-care/ https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/the-iron-math..., from someone who just assumed that child care costs were because of government intervention, and then did the math and found out this isn’t the case.
- newshorts 4y agoGenuinely wondering how anything beyond a 4:1 ratio is bad? My kids are in daycare in TX with well over a 4:1 ratio and seem like they are doing fine. What sorts of downsides are you referring to?
- bombcar 4y agoIt greatly depends on age! Having six kids ranging from 1-12 is a lot different than having six infants, who will likely all explode at the exact same time. Because it's hard to exactly define "daycares shouldn't have more kids than they can take care of" they institute fixed ratios.
- gambiting 4y agoUK is as expensive as it gets, but full time nursery(5 days a week) is "only" £800 a month for us. American costs seem to be completely absurd, despite much worse employment protections and benefits.
- em-bee 4y agogovernment subsidized?
- gambiting 4y agoI don't get any money from the government for it. If it's subsidized then it's not on my end. They just charge £200/week, it's a standard price.
- bombcar 4y agoHow many hours a week/day? And yes, it's likely subsidized; around here there's "free 4k" and some of the pre-4k daycares are subsidized in various ways.
- gambiting 4y ago9 hours a day, 7:30am till 4:30pm. It's a flat £200 a week.
- notch656a 4y agoI pay "only" 10% more than the exchange rate adjusted amount you're paying. Top 5 US city. Don't take too much stock in the ridiculous numbers you hear. I've lived in podunc land, the suburbs, and major city and I always paid within 10% of what you're paying. £1200 in my top 5 city would get you a newly built daycare, with all the modern gizmos, a kitchen built "especially for young children", a teacher with 10+ yr experience, and peer children who are the son/daughters of doctors and lawyers. ~£800 gets you an average daycare that is fully up to license / code and generally does a decent job. ~£600 will get you a caring but gray market (usually bilingual or limited english) stay at home mom with a home daycare business. I would wager the vast vast majority are paying close to ~£800, either through the black/gray market with unlicensed caregivers or in licensed facilities in the vast majority of lower cost of living portions of America.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoWhat is this top 5 US city? Half decent infant daycare in SF/SEA/NYC/LA/DC suburbs is going to be minimum $1,700 per month, in the cheapest of those metro areas. In tier 2 cities, I would question the quality for anything less than $1,300 per month. And in no major US city would I enroll my child in a $1,000 per month or less daycare. You can even back into the max teacher pay based on monthly daycare costs since you know how much staff is required, and knowing the living wage in some of these cities.
- notch656a 4y ago[deleted for privacy]
- lotsofpulp 4y agoKindercare (probably the lowest quality daycare I would find acceptable) is $2,000+ for infants in Seattle suburbs and $1,500+ in Portland suburbs. I would have expected Phoenix to be more expensive, but it is probably cheaper due to more lax staffing ratios.