Child Care: Seeking Parliament's Consent

[#juan]

It looks to me like Harper

is going to force another election when there is no clear indication that there will be anything but another minority government. This would be the third election in a year. Since federal elections cost in the region of 300 million dollars each, do we want another stupid election? Another minority government, either party, would also be just as prone to defeat and yet a forth election would be in the offing. I think Harper is being awfully generous with our money. A better bet would be to hold off on the day care thing and try to reach a compromise with the other parties. I don't think Harper has overwhelmed anyone with his performance so far, certainly not enough to win a majority.

I agree. As a matter of fact, let's get rid of these pesky elections all together. They are expensive, and force us citizens to walk all the way down to the local school to cast our ballots. Geez! That's the system Juan, and we should be thankful we live in a democracy and embrace every opportunity to cast a ballot.

Do I detect a note of sarcasm.... :wink:

The elections cost as much as they do because we taxpayers give each party a rather generous stipend to help pay election costs. We also pay for enumeration and other things that run up the price. I think the taxpayer is sorely used by these buffoons who think elections are toys they are entitled to use whenever it suits their wim.

 

[BitWhys]

Harper's got the fundie gay marriage war chest and being forced to call an election before that little number makes the floor plays right into his hands.

our opposition has no gonads.

 

[MMMike]

Sarcasm? Who me? I agree to a certain extent that election timing is manipulated for the benefit of the parties. I fully support fixed election dates for majority governments. But in a minority situation, all bets are off. It's a delicate balance though, and decision about forcing an election can come with some backlash.

 

[Colpy]

Re: RE: Child Care: Seeking P

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

Poor people usually don't work 9 to 5, when day cares are open.

Poor people have transportation problems to and from day care.

Poor people often have one parent stay at home with the kids, and take in friend's or family's kids for a little extra money.

NONE of this is helped by increased child care spaces.

Nor are people who live outside cities helped.

I'm always fascinated by predictably timely Conservative concern for the poor when acknowledgement of their very existence serves to add some questionably marginal benefit to otherwise dubiously justified programs.

a clawed back tax credit (once again the Cons are playing the wrong side of the supply/demand curve) and a brand new committee.

what an embarrassment.

Spare me your righteousness.

I've actually raised kids. My son was born in 1980, when I was unemployed. My daughter was born in 1984, when I was working about 60 hours a week for $7.65 an hour. We kept my wife home for a time, and went without, because she wanted to stay home. When she did go back to work, we paid her sister to care for our kids, as her family was also working poor, and she wanted to stay at home with her young son.

Our best friends had the mom stay home as well. He worked as a custodian in a school, her only income was as a bass player in a rock'n roll band.

My son works as a bar tender. Currently his wife is home watching their two kids. When she does go back to work, it will be in the evenings. He works nights.

The four families I have known best........all working poor.......all completely left out of the NDP/Liberal child welfare plan for latte-drinking, SUV driving, upper-middle class professional Torontonians.

Just look at that idiot Olivia Chow and her attack on the Conservative plan. Yes, you could pay back that much money to the government IF YOU MADE ENOUGH TO PAY THAT IN TAXES! The people I give a damn about don't pay much income tax. They also don't have cars, houses (they live in apts), cell phones etc. They also DON'T VOTE LIBERAL!

If you want to find a bunch of upper-middle class arrogant professional "I've come down from the upper class to mend your rotten ways" dickheads, just go to an NDP meeting, or a Liberal meeting. They are taking care of themselves, while making noises about helping the people that need it.

In case you haven't noticed, this issue drives me a little batty.

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: RE: Child Care: Seeking P

Spare me your righteousness.

I've actually raised kids. My son was born in 1980, when I was unemployed. My daughter was born in 1984, when I was working about 60 hours a week for $7.65 an hour. We kept my wife home for a time, and went without, because she wanted to stay home. When she did go back to work, we paid her sister to care for our kids, as her family was also working poor, and she wanted to stay at home with her young son.

Our best friends had the mom stay home as well. He worked as a custodian in a school, her only income was as a bass player in a rock'n roll band.

My son works as a bar tender. Currently his wife is home watching their two kids. When she does go back to work, it will be in the evenings. He works nights.

The four families I have known best........all working poor.......all completely left out of the NDP/Liberal child welfare plan for latte-drinking, SUV driving, upper-middle class professional Torontonians.

Just look at that idiot Olivia Chow and her attack on the Conservative plan. Yes, you could pay back that much money to the government IF YOU MADE ENOUGH TO PAY THAT IN TAXES! The people I give a damn about don't pay much income tax. They also don't have cars, houses (they live in apts), cell phones etc. They also DON'T VOTE LIBERAL!

If you want to find a bunch of upper-middle class arrogant professional "I've come down from the upper class to mend your rotten ways" dickheads, just go to an NDP meeting, or a Liberal meeting. They are taking care of themselves, while making noises about helping the people that need it.

In case you haven't noticed, this issue drives me a little batty.

Good morning, Colpy.

I have noticed that this issue is of particular interest to you — and has tended to be of a somewhat sensitive nature — so I am going to attempt to keep my comments as light and respectful as possible (I mean, I try to do that anyway, but sometimes particular attention is due).

In terms of your criticism of members of the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada, I would not quite agree with you. Notwithstanding my membership with the Grits, I would not consider my family "well-off" by any stretch of the word — my dad got quite sick a while back for several years, and he couldn't work, so my mom was attempting to support us unilaterally. Things are finally starting to look up, but keep in mind that overgeneralizations serve little purpose in the sphere of politics (and serve, in my opinion, only to cloud proper debate and discussion, with all due respect).

In terms of the child care issue in particular, however, I don't think that this plan is the best way to do it, personally. I mean, if the Government of Canada insists on taking this sort of "you're going to do it how we want to do it, or you can pay the price" mentality, then I suppose there's no choice. I would hope, however, that we can change this program to ensure that the resources are concentrated toward those who need them, instead of distributing them to everyone (however, in a press conference yesterday, the Prime Minister responded to a question like this, and stated unequivocally that the Government would sooner be defeated than accept any such amendment).

Sucks when you feel helpless to do anything. I wish I was an M.P., lol.

 

[Colpy]

You Five, are ALWAYS respectful.

I would also like to see resources aimed at the people that need them.

Edited to say:

Good Morning to you too.

School bores you to death, doesn't it?

Or at least doesn't challenge you at all.

 

[BitWhys]

blah blah blah

If you bothered to pay attention to Chow instead of instinctively slagging her in a rush of false indignity you'd have realized her solution (echoing the Caledon study) delivers the direct payment to the working poor you're so concerned about instead of only pretending to as it will under the Conservative plan. so you spare me. thanks.

 

[Colpy]

blah blah blah

If you bothered to pay attention to Chow instead of instinctively slagging her in a rush of false indignity you'd have realized her solution (echoing the Caledon study) delivers the direct payment to the working poor you're so concerned about instead of only pretending to as it will under the Conservative plan. so you spare me. thanks.

All I saw of Chow, and about all of her I can stand, is the post at the head of this thread.

Yeah. She is mightily concerned about those that pay 37% federal income tax after deductions.

How many kids have you raised?

 

[FiveParadox]

Re: RE: Child Care: Seeking Parliament's Consent

School bores you to death, doesn't it?

Usually no; however, everyone else in this class is away getting work experience credit. My friends and teachers conspired against me to have me placed at the school, though; some of my friends said that they wouldn't have felt right letting me go into downtown Vancouver by myself — apparently they didn't think I'd be safe. And my teachers agreed with them.

The sentiment is sweet, but God, I'm so freakin' bored! :lol:

BitWhys, I agree with Ms. Chow in terms of her suggestion that the amount promised by the Government is going to be significantly decreased by taxes (while perhaps not, on average, as much as she contends). However, I think it's important that we be realistic. This Government has said that it's either their way, or election time.

 

[LittleRunningGag]

Re: RE: Child Care: Seeking P

I think you have misunderstood.

I agree that I would prefer the payments be made on income, and I would like to see them doubled (and paid out to the lower income 50%)

However, the Child Tax Credit will NOT disappear, at least in my understanding. It will remain the same, and the $1200 is added to it.

As I have repeatedly argued on this forum, direct payments are the only way to help the working poor.

I agree, I voted to take this budget with ammendments. I fully support giving direct payments to the working poor (I'm a student, do I count? :lol. What I have a problem with is giving money to everyone, regardless of income.

Even with the clawbacks on the wealthy, they are still gaining money that they have no need for. Not to mention that there are plenty of millionaires in this country that qualify for GST rebates through the miracle of good accounting. And these people will also receive these payments, in full, on top of not having to pay a dime in taxes.

Once again, the middle class gets screwed.

 

[BitWhys]

Re: RE: Child Care: Seeking Parliament's Consent

...This Government has said that it's either their way, or election time.

If it comes to that I suppose it all depends on whether Harper thinks people are stupid enough to not know the difference between an allowance and a benefit.

I still I don't think it will though. Whoever takes over can straighten it out after the next budget (or this one's update) fails.

 

[Jay]

My support of day care programs is only marginal at this point. By the same token I wouldn't call for a governments fall over its implementation, either.

I'm ambivalent about the program but am surprised at how quickly some people downplay the art of successfully getting all the provinces to agree on ANYTHING. and now its going to get thrown away.

They can all take their little federally run day care programs and place them in the behinds. This is not even close to a federal responsibility. I hold the Liberal responsible for this stupid politicking over something the feds have no right to be involved in. Instead of doing the job of running the Country they want to run daycare centers....I think the Liberals need to be placed in a daycare program. What are the Liberals going to promise us next that is none of their business...Texas?

 

[BitWhys]

the idea does seem to have potential. no translation on that Müller-Kucera and Bauer study I could find, but the OECD study has all the facts you can eat and a wicked bibliography.

Child Care and child poverty

A 2001 Swiss study determined that publicly funded child care results in:

A doubling of the hours mothers were able to work.
Higher productivity and earnings due to maintaining productive workers.
Higher contributions to social security and savings.
Less dependency on social assistance during both the productive and retirement ages.
The study further showed that the public investment in child care was offset more than 200% in additional tax revenues and reduced public spending on social assistance.

Yet in Canada, a 2004 OECD study found there had been no significant expansion of public child care in a decade, outside of Quebec. Despite Liberal promises of action, less than 20% of children aged 0-6 years find a place in a regulated, public child care facility – compared to Belgium (63%), Denmark (78%) and the U.K. (60%), as examples.

The NDP has fought for years alongside women, early childhood education experts and parents for a national commitment to quality child care.

Funding was promised in the very first Liberal Red Book of campaign promises in 1993. We had to wait for 12 years and four elections until a minority Parliament forced the Liberals to put that promise into practice. New Democrats celebrate the fact that NDP governments in Manitoba and Saskatchewan signed agreements to ensure the non-profit delivery of child care.

But the Liberals are still failing Canada’s families by allowing precious federal dollars to be diverted to profits for commercial child care companies. Jack Layton and the NDP have tirelessly pressed the government to direct its funding to building a comprehensive system of high-quality, licensed, non-profit child care.

A great deal more must be done if we are to have the early childhood education system Canada needs to succeed in the 21st century.

Jack Layton and the NDP will work in the next Parliament to:
- Introduce a National Child Care Act, legislation that will firmly establish a framework for a national child care and early learning system with a permanent commitment for the federal government. It will establish standards for a network of high-quality, licensed, non-profit care for our children.
- Invest $1.8 billion in the first year, and then increase this sum by $250 million a year over the following three years. At an average of $9,000 per space, this commitment means we will be providing 200,000 spaces for children, with an additional 25,000 children finding care in each of the next three years.

So Harper is talking about 125,000 and Layton is talking about 275,000. I must admit I'm habitually suspect of CPC estimates and perenial nickel-dime antics. Seems to me the frontloaded expenses will make the first 125,000 more expensive than the next 150,000.

this budget is going to be a hoot.

 

[Jay]

Despite Liberal promises of action, less than 20% of children aged 0-6 years find a place in a regulated, public child care facility

So whats the big deal?

Do I have to have my parents licensed by the feds to look after my child?


Do they want to institutionalize everyone?

 

[FiveParadox]

Jay, I would think that they are contrasting regulated, public child care to unregulated, unlicensed child care givers who aren't related.

 

[BitWhys]

So whats the big deal?

Do I have to have my parents licensed by the feds to look after my child?


Do they want to institutionalize everyone?

so are your folks ready to take care of another 125,000 kids tomorrow? funny thing about society, just because its somebody else's problem doesn't mean it won't effect you in the long run.

that's right 5P. 15% regulated day care centers. most of those are private, usually not-for-profit.

 

[Jay]

I'm about to add 1 to that number, and for the life of me I'm not anywhere near as concerned about all of this as people who don't even have kids.

Ontario already subsidizes this beast called day care that has everyone (or excuse me all Liberals who didn't do anything about it when THEY had a mandate to do it) up in arms.

Why is Ontario already subsidizing day care? Because we are in the subsidizing daycare bussiness at the moment. Why do the leftists want to take tax money away from provinces so they can fund day care? Because they are in the business of communism.

 

[FiveParadox]

Come to think of it, Jay, I don't recall you making any parts in favour of the endeavour of the Government of Canada, but rather, only points opposed to the program pushed by the Liberal Party of Canada (and to an extent, I suppose, the New Democratic Party of Canada).

 

[Jay]

I'll take the money, cause the governments screws me over....but I have declared they can ALL stick their federal day care programs in their bum bums.

 

[bluealberta]

Just look at that idiot Olivia Chow and her attack on the Conservative plan. Yes, you could pay back that much money to the government IF YOU MADE ENOUGH TO PAY THAT IN TAXES! The people I give a damn about don't pay much income tax. They also don't have cars, houses (they live in apts), cell phones etc. They also DON'T VOTE LIBERAL!

That is what I have been trying to say all along, Colpy, thank you for restating it again. People needing child care on lower incomes typically pay little or no tax, so the $1200 will make virtually no difference, and if you are higher income and this changes your taxes, too bad. Don't forget too that child care is deductible, so the less a subsidy one receives, the more deductible you have. For example, if a kid costs $400 per month, and you get a subsidy or $200, you get to deduct $200. Alternatively, if you get no subsidy, you get to deduct the full $400. The system works, there will be no reduction in the subsidies that have been around for years, the CTC will not be affected. This simply puts money into the hands of all parents, with each parent having a choice. Plain and simple, instead of having the government make the choice for you.