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. chongl+Nd[view] [source] 2025-09-09 15:22:39
>>dzink+Y6
I appreciate your optimism but I’m skeptical. I dated someone who worked in child care (with a degree in ECE). She was quite miserable caring for a dozen screaming babies all day. I think the burnout and turnover for such a job (which requires a degree but still paid minimum wage) is likely to be extremely high.

The other thing that doesn’t make sense to me is the economics of it. The pay for the staff is very low but the cost of service to parents is very high. That means so much of the cost is overhead which would make the whole thing quite unsustainable, even when ostensibly covered by the government.

I live in Canada and a similar issue is occurring with our universal health care system. The costs are skyrocketing even as wait times are increasing.

◧◩◪
3. ambica+Ni[view] [source] 2025-09-09 15:39:40
>>chongl+Nd
Maybe babies aren't meant to be cared for a dozen at a time? But no, we have to "scale" child-rearing, just like we have to scale everything for greater growth numbers. \s
◧◩◪◨
4. papyru+071[view] [source] 2025-09-09 18:43:56
>>ambica+Ni
Babies, just like adults, are extremely social animals. And they absolutely need to interact with a bunch of other people their age, even more than us. Daily, and for a long period of time. An hour at the park doesn't cut it, and being all day with a sibling doesn't either.

So beyond everyone going back to a Neolithic way of life and living in a bunch of straw teepees all bundled close together, daycare is the best solution I've found to this need.

Just as an example, my oldest has been besties with another kid since they were both 7 months old.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. ndrisc+oo1[view] [source] 2025-09-09 19:46:47
>>papyru+071
As a counter-example, neither of my kids really acknowledged other kids in any way at that age (and other infants ignored them right back). A quick Internet search suggests it's normal for them to not interact with other kids until after 12+ months. This was a point of contention with my wife and MIL because my MIL would complain we weren't "socializing" our oldest enough when she was an infant despite clearly never having looked up anything about childhood development.

That and we did take her out all the time. She just wasn't in daycare. The thing about stay-at-home parents is they don't literally stay at home all day.

[go to top]