zlacker

[return to "New Mexico is first state in US to offer universal child care"]
1. dzink+Y6[view] [source] 2025-09-09 14:57:09
>>toomuc+(OP)
This is fantastic! I hope they succeed and there is no abuse or other issues, because it will show how much an economy can grow when women are allowed to work to their full potential. Families who were previously in poverty because the mom would struggle to pay for childcare to work can now have assurance kids are ok while the mom can pursue jobs, start her own small business (huge chunk of businesses are small businesses ran by women) and prosper. If you pose your child’s safety vs another dollar, most parents would vote for their children. But if the children are taken care of, parents can give the economy their best and the taxes paid and GDP gained will pay back for the expense manyfold.
◧◩
2. KetoMa+Bq[view] [source] 2025-09-09 16:06:59
>>dzink+Y6
You don't understand how economics work if you think this is actually going to be helpful. By providing "universal" child care, you just moved the cost of childcare from the individual to the tax base so now everyone has to pay an ineffifient system that often eats up 30-50% of the incoming money in bureaucratic inneficiencies before it will even reach the child care system.

On top of that the increased taxes are going to raise prices of everything because the businesses don't just eat the cost of taxes, they pass it off to the consumer. So all these families that get free childcare are going to be paying more for their groceries, rent, unilities and everything else.

To top things off, you now have random strangers with no bond with your children looking after them in a ratio of maybe 1:8 or 1:10. So your children are going to be stressed out and anxious and are going to act out both at the childcare place and at home, so you're just going to be getting phone calls all day about your children fighting other children.

All in all, you might feel like you're better off but once you do the math you're at about the same place if not worse off.

◧◩◪
3. nemoma+Pq[view] [source] 2025-09-09 16:07:49
>>KetoMa+Bq
You could say all of this about public schooling, but that one worked out.
◧◩◪◨
4. KetoMa+8x[view] [source] 2025-09-09 16:30:49
>>nemoma+Pq
It has not at all. 20% of high school graduates are reading at a 5th grade level, which when you consider the billions of dollars poured into public schools every year is just asinine https://www.abtaba.com/blog/us-literacy-statistics
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. ecshaf+HG[view] [source] 2025-09-09 17:07:51
>>KetoMa+8x
US school outcomes vary drastically. It really works out well in nice neighborhoods, and doesn't work out in some bad neighborhoods. Its down to cultural and familial expectations. Why does the same curriculum in say Scarsdale not have the same success in the Bronx? They are only like 15 miles apart in the same state.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. KetoMa+KJ[view] [source] 2025-09-09 17:20:23
>>ecshaf+HG
The nice neighborhoods have parents that prioritize spending with their children, reading with them and helping them work through things they are struggling with and due to that they then score better on the standardized tests.

The curriculum is just a net zero, and could be argued that it's a net negative because it wastes the kids time with useless knowledge that they will never need or use.

[go to top]