Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,891 
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
September 3rd, 2006, 04:54 PM
If you want to see incompetent, let the bloody government take over!
Personally, I would certainly rather see parents raise their kids than let the gov't do it!
Quoting
WOW!
If childcare is to receive more funding then I want a meaningful say in how those kids are raised. My money, my time, my say. I'm very unhappy with the job most parents are doing and I can't think of anything less responsible than offering more dollars to the incompetent.
If you want to see incompetent, let the bloody government take over!
Personally, I would certainly rather see parents raise their kids than let the gov't do it!
Yo
Posts: 3,537
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
September 3rd, 2006, 05:58 PM
Quoting
Of course no one choses to break their leg, but why should I have to help pay for someone's medical treatment in your province? Is it federal money being used for this purpose that you have a problem with, or just the idea of subsidies in general, regardless of their nature being give for childcare? Both, right?
[
It isn't really your problem is it? The difference, however, is that you choose to have children, it isn't often that a person chooses to have their leg broken. And if they do intentionally break their leg, I don't think that I should have to pay for that either.
It isn't really your problem is it? The difference, however, is that you choose to have children, it isn't often that a person chooses to have their leg broken. And if they do intentionally break their leg, I don't think that I should have to pay for that either.
Yo
Posts: 3,537
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
September 3rd, 2006, 05:59 PM
Quoting
Good idea. Open a daycare centre or after school progam for your community's youth.
If childcare is to receive more funding then I want a meaningful say in how those kids are raised. My money, my time, my say. I'm very unhappy with the job most parents are doing and I can't think of anything less responsible than offering more dollars to the incompetent.
Yo
Posts: 3,537
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
Location: Counting Flowers on the Wall
September 3rd, 2006, 06:02 PM
Quoting
[disclaimer]
I don't advocate publicly sponsored child care either. Just pointing out the flaw in your argument.
[/disclaimer]
These do exist, the problem is there isn't enough spots or people willing to do it, espeically for school aged children. Not enough money and they take up a full spot.
Quoting
If that is the goal, we should be subsidising private day care, and day homes. Or we should be paying women to put their kids into day care. Giving a cheque to parents for having children doesn't necessarily accomplish that goal.
Our economy relies on people working. Demand for labor as the boomers head for retirement is increasing. Everyone benefits from mothers getting into the workforce.
[disclaimer]
I don't advocate publicly sponsored child care either. Just pointing out the flaw in your argument.
[/disclaimer]
Bright Spark
Posts: 313
September 3rd, 2006, 06:11 PM
Quoting
In principle I agree with you. If I'm going to pay for someone else's childbearing choices then do I also get a say in whether or not they are allowed to breed? In reality, however, best if the governmnet butts out of deciding who has kids and paying for raising those kids after the fact. Quality eduation and health education I have no probelm with...beyond that it fosters irresponsibility. Much less expensive to fund free condom distribution and free volunteer sterilization.
If childcare is to receive more funding then I want a meaningful say in how those kids are raised. My money, my time, my say. I'm very unhappy with the job most parents are doing and I can't think of anything less responsible than offering more dollars to the incompetent.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 3,154
September 3rd, 2006, 07:25 PM
I think we can all live with helping those who have fallen on hard times. None of us is immune to misfortune. But where a society should draw the line is with those who bring a child into the world knowing they lack the prerequisites necessary to do the job that lies ahead. Welfare teen moms are a case in point. Often poorly educated, often unmarried, often jobless. Who the hell do they think they are?
I think we can all live with helping those who have fallen on hard times. None of us is immune to misfortune. But where a society should draw the line is with those who bring a child into the world knowing they lack the prerequisites necessary to do the job that lies ahead. Welfare teen moms are a case in point. Often poorly educated, often unmarried, often jobless. Who the hell do they think they are?
Clever Clogs
Posts: 583
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Location: Calgary, Alberta
September 3rd, 2006, 11:03 PM
People can always choose not to have children. There is always an alternative. There is not a single person, who has kids, that didn't have the option of not having those kids. That is not my problem.
I don't have an issue with helping people out if they actually deserve it, like the afore mentioned change in financial situation, but when people simply assume that it is my responsiblity to pay for their procreation, I have a problem with that.
As far as subsidies, I really think that there is a place for them, depending on what they are used for, but not for child care. You want to fund schools, thats cool, that helps everyone. You want to fund health care? Fine, again, that helps everyone. Child subsidies help people that don't need help, and don't do enough for those who really need it.
Quoting
The difference is that parenthood is a voluntary condition. Broken leg generally isn't. If you choose to have a child, and are unable or unwilling to pay for it, you shouldn't be able to force everyone else to pay for it. Quoting
Of course no one choses to break their leg, but why should I have to help pay for someone's medical treatment in your province? Is it federal money being used for this purpose that you have a problem with, or just the idea of subsidies in general, regardless of their nature being give for childcare? Both, right?
[
It isn't really your problem is it? The difference, however, is that you choose to have children, it isn't often that a person chooses to have their leg broken. And if they do intentionally break their leg, I don't think that I should have to pay for that either.
It isn't really your problem is it? The difference, however, is that you choose to have children, it isn't often that a person chooses to have their leg broken. And if they do intentionally break their leg, I don't think that I should have to pay for that either.
People can always choose not to have children. There is always an alternative. There is not a single person, who has kids, that didn't have the option of not having those kids. That is not my problem.
I don't have an issue with helping people out if they actually deserve it, like the afore mentioned change in financial situation, but when people simply assume that it is my responsiblity to pay for their procreation, I have a problem with that.
As far as subsidies, I really think that there is a place for them, depending on what they are used for, but not for child care. You want to fund schools, thats cool, that helps everyone. You want to fund health care? Fine, again, that helps everyone. Child subsidies help people that don't need help, and don't do enough for those who really need it.
