3 ms·

Subsidies to mothers are already massive. For example: Free k-12 school. That's a $3-10k/year subsidy right there (taxpayers spend $11,073 on this $3k-$10k sub

Subsidies to mothers are already massive. For example: Free k-12 school. That's a $3-10k/year subsidy right there (taxpayers spend $11,073 on this $3k-$10k subsidy - what a deal!). Another example: Many states require paid maternity leave (is this Federal now?). That's a pretty massive subsidy! Another example: We do have super high rates of child support in the Anglosphere, you know. Look to France & others for more sane approaches to this subject and more sane rates. (France & sane? I'm serious!). Where does this all end? What level of subsidization is sufficient? I bet someone even responds to me with a 'for the children' comment. You watch.

rayiner 13y ago
This is one of the most absurd comments I've ever read. How is free K-12 a subsidy to mothers? If anything, public education is a huge subsidy to employers. Also, child support mandates in the U.S. are not high and in many cases don't come close to covering half the costs of child rearing. Say the father makes $45,000/year (far above the national median individual income). His net income is Illinois is around $2,700 per month. His child support obligation is $540/month. That's $6,500 per year, or about half the annual average cost of raising a child in the urban midwest according to this calculator: http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/cost-of-children/?iid=EL http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/cost-of-children/?iid=EL. That level is already a huge subsidy from the mother to the father. The mother and father pay half the expenses of raising the child, but on top of that the mother takes on all of the domestic work necessary to raise the kid, and also shoulders the full career hit that comes from having childcare responsibilities. As someone who has tried to outsource a lot of domestic childcare duties, let me say that the market value of the domestic labor provided solely by the mother in this example far outweighs the total income of the median male.
- alexeisadeski3 13y ago
  Reality check: Outside of the Anglosphere, child support often tops out around a few hundred dollars/month. The average support level in France is ~$160/mo. How do those poor French mothers survive? >If anything, public education is a huge subsidy to employers. If left to their own devices, I doubt employers would choose to spend $11k/yr/pupil on fingerpainting and remedial math.
  - quinnchr 13y ago
    It's almost as if France has a robust social safety net. Child support just might be less. if we had things like: 1) inexpensive municipal day care 2) tax breaks for families employing in-home child care workers 3) universal free preschool beginning at age 3. As to your last point I'm assuming you're implying that all women learn in K-12 is painting fingernails and remedial math, in which case, fuck you.
    - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
      You don't know what fingerpainting is :( Re: Social safety net: That's why child support stops after the child turns three? (that's a joke for those who don't know it continues to 18)
      - quinnchr 13y ago
        Oh duh, finger painting, gotcha, my mistake. Why do you say remedial math though? Why would child support stop at 3 just because there's free preschool? You still have to provide all the other necessities of life like, you know, food and clothing.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Nobody has ever given a shit about what the French think. A child is the product of a father and a mother. When parents don't stay together, the only logical way to divide the burden of raising a child is to allocate 50% of the monetary expenses and 50% of the labor to each parent. Anything that allocates less than this to fathers is a huge subsidy from women to men. As for employers, finger-painting is pre-K, which isn't universally free in the states. Starting in Kindergarten, education starts with basic literacy. The production of a literate and numerate workforce is a huge subsidy to employers. The crack about remedial math actually undermines your position: its remedial math that creates the huge population of people who have enough basic numeracy to operate a cash register, thus driving the cost of cashiers down to almost nothing. Also, the high supply of literate and numerate labor drives down the wages of each marginal employee, allowing employers to capture a higher percentage of the value generated by the employee. If an employer makes $25 per hour off of someone he pays $10, and public education makes that person employable, then right there the employer benefits mord from education than the employee. Finally, remember that in the states education is funded by property taxes, which are largely paid for by families and not businesses. So families pay most of that $11k per year, not businesses. And leaving aside the benefit to employers, why do you call K12 a subsidy to mothers, rather than both fathers and mothers equally?
GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago
I don't think you know anything about paid maternity leave in this country as compared to the rest of the world: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/maternity-leave-paid-parental-leave-_n_2617284.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/maternity-leave-pai...

rayiner 13y ago

This is one of the most absurd comments I've ever read. How is free K-12 a subsidy to mothers? If anything, public education is a huge subsidy to employers. Also, child support mandates in the U.S. are not high and in many cases don't come close to covering half the costs of child rearing. Say the father makes $45,000/year (far above the national median individual income). His net income is Illinois is around $2,700 per month. His child support obligation is $540/month. That's $6,500 per year, or about half the annual average cost of raising a child in the urban midwest according to this calculator: http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/cost-of-children/?iid=EL http://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/cost-of-children/?iid=EL. That level is already a huge subsidy from the mother to the father. The mother and father pay half the expenses of raising the child, but on top of that the mother takes on all of the domestic work necessary to raise the kid, and also shoulders the full career hit that comes from having childcare responsibilities. As someone who has tried to outsource a lot of domestic childcare duties, let me say that the market value of the domestic labor provided solely by the mother in this example far outweighs the total income of the median male.

alexeisadeski3 13y ago
Reality check: Outside of the Anglosphere, child support often tops out around a few hundred dollars/month. The average support level in France is ~$160/mo. How do those poor French mothers survive? >If anything, public education is a huge subsidy to employers. If left to their own devices, I doubt employers would choose to spend $11k/yr/pupil on fingerpainting and remedial math.
- quinnchr 13y ago
  It's almost as if France has a robust social safety net. Child support just might be less. if we had things like: 1) inexpensive municipal day care 2) tax breaks for families employing in-home child care workers 3) universal free preschool beginning at age 3. As to your last point I'm assuming you're implying that all women learn in K-12 is painting fingernails and remedial math, in which case, fuck you.
  - alexeisadeski3 13y ago
    You don't know what fingerpainting is :( Re: Social safety net: That's why child support stops after the child turns three? (that's a joke for those who don't know it continues to 18)
    - quinnchr 13y ago
      Oh duh, finger painting, gotcha, my mistake. Why do you say remedial math though? Why would child support stop at 3 just because there's free preschool? You still have to provide all the other necessities of life like, you know, food and clothing.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Nobody has ever given a shit about what the French think. A child is the product of a father and a mother. When parents don't stay together, the only logical way to divide the burden of raising a child is to allocate 50% of the monetary expenses and 50% of the labor to each parent. Anything that allocates less than this to fathers is a huge subsidy from women to men. As for employers, finger-painting is pre-K, which isn't universally free in the states. Starting in Kindergarten, education starts with basic literacy. The production of a literate and numerate workforce is a huge subsidy to employers. The crack about remedial math actually undermines your position: its remedial math that creates the huge population of people who have enough basic numeracy to operate a cash register, thus driving the cost of cashiers down to almost nothing. Also, the high supply of literate and numerate labor drives down the wages of each marginal employee, allowing employers to capture a higher percentage of the value generated by the employee. If an employer makes $25 per hour off of someone he pays $10, and public education makes that person employable, then right there the employer benefits mord from education than the employee. Finally, remember that in the states education is funded by property taxes, which are largely paid for by families and not businesses. So families pay most of that $11k per year, not businesses. And leaving aside the benefit to employers, why do you call K12 a subsidy to mothers, rather than both fathers and mothers equally?

GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago

I don't think you know anything about paid maternity leave in this country as compared to the rest of the world: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/maternity-leave-paid-parental-leave-_n_2617284.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/maternity-leave-pai...