zlacker

>>toomuc+(OP)
It's easy to promise things, but hard to deliver them. How can the state "guarantee no-cost universal child?"

Will the state provide the child care itself? Or will the attempt to provide funding, relying on the private market to provide the service. Are there a bunch of underworked child care providers just waiting around for new customers? Or would they expect the child care industry to go on a hiring spree?

Regardless who provides it, more workers would be required to deliver the service, and new facilities as well. What industries will those workers come from, who will now see reduced services and higher prices as a result? What doesn't get built while the construction workers are building new child care facilities?

Child care tends to be highly regulated. Is the government doing anything (aside from funding) to make it easier to open and run a child-care facility?

It's so easy to spend money. The hard part is the real-world actions and tradeoffs required. Everything comes at the cost of something else we could have had instead.

What you will see is: The funding will go to the people who are already receiving child-care services today, along with big price increases immediately and over time as government money chases supply that is slow to grow.

>>Nifty3+t7
I drive on roads, I use libraries, I have police and fire protection. My children go to school. My city and state provide services to me and fellow citizens. This is no different, and we pay for it with taxes.

I like taxes, with them I buy civilization (which I also am fond of).

(The evidence also shows economic benefits of enabling parents to work when they want to by providing childcare)

https://illumine.app/blog/how-much-childcare-costs-by-state-...

https://childcaredeserts.org/

https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1064...

>>toomuc+88
I don't understand how many other developed countries are able to avoid the supposedly unavoidable perils of social services, but we act like this is a wild experiment that has never been tried anywhere in the world aside from the USSR or something.

>>qgin+KE2
There are bad public services and fairly good public services. There are also some great private services and some bad ones.

There's no public roads where I live. They're all private easements, but you can pass through them no problem for miles and miles and get most the way to town without ever touching a taxpayer dime. I first built my bit of the road with a shovel , a 4x4 truck, and a hatchet which blows away what it would have cost my neighbors in taxes. If I tried to explain this to someone with no real concept of anything but a public road system their brain would probably explode trying to understand how this works out better than even many public road systems.

There are a lot of people with exploding brains who can never get to the point of realizing our private road system is working as well as public road systems, and other exploding brains not realizing the public roads are working as well as their private roads.

The main pain point I have tends to be that when the option for peaceful voluntary trade is available, I strongly prefer it over the violence of forcing others via taxation. Therefore I much prefer the situation of my community -- i.e. basically no police/fire, no public roads, and no public utilities. It works great but the pride point is the very low level of violence / involuntary funding necessary to make it happen.