If working poor women get this so called $1200 a year and are having their incomes supplemented by assistance, won't it just be clawed back by provincial governments?
Day Care Issue
- Thread starter Roy
- Start date
Colpy said:TenPenny said:
I see your point, TP.
I use "elitist" when I mean intellectual elitist.
You know, people who think they have been blessed with sole knowledge of truth, and it is their destiny to rule und instruct the Great Unwashed Masses.
I see how this bothers you.
I'll try and do better.
Try harder; you're an embarrassement to your alma mater.
How about a tax break for parents that want to stay home and raise there kids 8) Its a proven fact that kids that have a parent at home do better socially and mentaly .I'd bet it would even help cut vandalizim and other crimes .Having your kids raised by strangers just don't seem right to me .Both these plans are total bullshit and a complete waste of tax money typical Canadian politics .What a pathetic bunch we have running the show .Oopps I mean pretending to run the show :evil:
The NDP plan is the best of the bunch.
Layton Puts Children First, Puts boots to the Liberals
A teaser:
TORONTO, ONTARIO--(CCNMatthews - Dec. 12, 2005) - NDP Leader Jack Layton announced the NDP's plan to improve child care in Canada and measures to fight child poverty. Layton was speaking at the Parkdale Beach Child Care Centre in Toronto.
The NDP plan to improve child care and fight child poverty has three
main elements:
- A Child Care Act to ensure that federal funding for child care is
targeted at licensed, high-quality, non-profit child care.
- $1.8 billion invested in child care next year, with annual
increases of $250 million for the next three years. This would
create 200,000 additional spaces in the first year, with another
25,000 spaces annually after that.
- An increase in the federal child tax credit of $1,000 phased in
over four years in order to help lower-income families cover child
care costs and meet other essential expenses. [/end of teaser]
Looks pretty dam good to me.
Layton Puts Children First, Puts boots to the Liberals
A teaser:
TORONTO, ONTARIO--(CCNMatthews - Dec. 12, 2005) - NDP Leader Jack Layton announced the NDP's plan to improve child care in Canada and measures to fight child poverty. Layton was speaking at the Parkdale Beach Child Care Centre in Toronto.
The NDP plan to improve child care and fight child poverty has three
main elements:
- A Child Care Act to ensure that federal funding for child care is
targeted at licensed, high-quality, non-profit child care.
- $1.8 billion invested in child care next year, with annual
increases of $250 million for the next three years. This would
create 200,000 additional spaces in the first year, with another
25,000 spaces annually after that.
- An increase in the federal child tax credit of $1,000 phased in
over four years in order to help lower-income families cover child
care costs and meet other essential expenses. [/end of teaser]
Looks pretty dam good to me.
That maybe so no1 but under that plan the goverment is still saying daycare is better than parebts at raising children A waste of money that in the end will do more harm than good
A waste of money that in the end will do more harm than goodNobody's saying that daycare is better than having a parent at home. But sometimes it isn't really possible or realistic to expect that a parent can stay home. When it takes two paychecks to maintain even a middle-class household and support those children, just how do you expect families to manage with just one parent working, MrMom? Not everyone has the luxury of being able to have one parent stay home full-time. It would be nice, but so would lots of things that aren't part of the current reality.
And what would do with single-parent families? Full support until the youngest child is old enough to be home alone? Forced marriages based on computer-matching single parents to each other and then draw straws to see which one works and which one stays home?
And what would do with single-parent families? Full support until the youngest child is old enough to be home alone? Forced marriages based on computer-matching single parents to each other and then draw straws to see which one works and which one stays home?
That what I'm saying Summer Why not give familys some incentive to have a parent stay home and look after their kids :? Cheaper than daycare and much better in the long run .Having kids raised by strangers does them good :roll: .As it stands right now theres zero incentive for a parent to stay home .Parents that stay home usually are voluteers in the schools and comunitys .Just throwing money into daycare spaces is shortsided and well just dumb typical canadian politicts no thought : Oh by the way I have 3 of them :wink:
mrmom2 said:
Oh, give me a break. You really expect anyone to think there wouldn't be massive btching if suddenly the government decided to pay the equivalent of one parent's wages for the entire time it takes to get the last kid out of the nest or at least old enough to not need looking after? No way does day care cost that much. Besides, you and I both know that there would be some who would play the system and just keep having kids in order to stay on the government paycheck rather than having to get a real job.
Also, who's going to do those jobs that are currently being done by the working parents you'd be sending home? And what about falling birthrates because of people who'd decide to opt for career over parenthood?
Heya I'm not saying pay anybody anything you got me wrong there 8O I'm saying maybe some kind of tax break like they do in Quebec .Some kind of incentive to keep your kids out of daycare thus saving tax dollars on daycare spaces . If ya knew anything about me you'd know I hate the goverment and want nothing but to keep my hard earned money from them .I'm more than willing to pay my fare share. I'm just sick of them telling us they know better than we do .I'm looking for no hand out here Summer I'd rather keep my Tax money their going to waste on daycare spaces I'll never use and by the way my wife and I both work .I don't hold my hand out for nothing :twisted:
Here in Calgary (maybe it's different in Toronto, Vancouver, etc.) the Conservative child care credit has been a big hit among immigrant and ethnic groups. These groups often have grandmother, a sister, friend, etc. do the 'child care' and would receive the dollars. These are traditional Liberal voters and, not that it determines the outcome of any election in Calgary (a Conservative slam dunk), it would interesting how these groups are viewing the $1200 in other urban centres. Maybe those groups are Liberal 'locks' and it has little impact.
If someone isn't working and thus has no income, how on earth is a tax break going to do them any good?mrmom2 said:
Somebody's got to feed, house and clothe the kids (and the parent or parents, for that matter). If a parent isn't earning an income because s/he is at home as a full-time parent, then the money to support the family has to come from somewhere. Giving a tax break to someone without an income to begin with isn't going to do it.
So far you haven't provided and example of the government saying it knows better than parents do in this issue.
It's not about spaces you're never going to use, though. Do you oppose paying for roads you'll never personally drive on? Cures for diseases you'll never have? Part of the price of living in a society with other people is contributing to the common good. Also, not everyone has the luxury of being able to work at home, or stagger their working hours so that one parent can always be home. If what both parents do for a living is something that is basically only open between 8AM and 5PM, then that's when they have to work. I'm glad you're as fortunate as you are, but not everyone is you.
Sure you do. You do it every time you expect society to serve you up a safe, comfortable environment peopled by educated, healthy adults and properly-supervised children without being willing to pitch in your fair share of what it takes to make that happen in society as a whole.
I don't suppose you're familiar with the concept that "no man is an island"? Well, it's true of families as well.
Your not getting what I'm trying to say not your fault I'm not the best at spitting out what I'm trying to get at so i guess we can disagree on this .Thats what i come here for 8) If we all agreed this place would suck :lol: .i like reading your posts though keep up the good work . :wink:
How much do you have to give them to make it worth their while? $12K/year? $20K/year?
The thing is that people don't work because they want to. If they did then nobody would ever retire and lottery winners wouldn't quit their jobs.
You can already claim kids as a deduction, and a stay-at-home parent becomes a dependent too, so there is already an incentive there. The stay-at-home parents are already being paid.
The reality is that most people can't afford for one person to stay home, and the government can't afford it either. That's why we all know so many people who scramble to find daycare places for their kids.
The NDP have the best plan. It creates spaces and provides licensed, non-profit daycare for those who need it.
I'm not talking about giving people huge sums of money :roll: Feck why not give people a tax credit for the amount of money there going to waste creating a daycare space for my kids .Throwing a bunch of money at daycares will not fix the problem .You too sound like daycare providers just licking your chops on the tax dollars your going to rake in Theres got to be some better ideas out there don't ya think?
Theres got to be some better ideas out there don't ya think?I guess we'll have to, since we don't appear to be connecting somehow.mrmom2 said:
Thanks for the compliment, though.