zlacker

> I mean, if there is some stay at home parent that finds looking after their own children during the daytime such a burden they "need" an extra $1k per child per month to do it... they should probably just use the free childcare.

The fact that you argue for daycare workers to be paid but not parents is honestly astonishing.

“No, we will not give you $100/day for your kid but we will happily give $100/day to BabyCorp to watch your kid” is a really fucked up policy stance unless you explicitly want to break children apart from their families. If that’s the goal, just explicitly say it.

>>kortil+(OP)
> The fact that you argue for daycare workers to be paid but not parents is honestly astonishing.

I think it's even more astonishing that you are arguing that it's normal for parents to have so little love for their own child they should bill the government for time spent with them.

If my stay-at-home mum was like that, I'd definitely have preferred the full time daycare. It was even possible for her to send me to daycare some of the time without breaking the family up!

>>notaha+UN
They are arguing the exact opposite, that parents love their kids enough they might move mountains to take care of the kids themselves if only they get get a bit of the taxes the state is sucking dry from their family back, enabling it to economically happen.

>>notaha+UN
I didn’t argue that at all. If money is being given to help raise children, it should go directly to parents. They can choose to spend on outsourcing their rearing (like you seem to advocate for), or they could use it to buy things to make raising their own child better (educational tools, etc).