Publicly-funded care that only costs $10 a day

[Veovis]

If it makes you feel better, think how it would help to expand the taxable income - not completely recover the cost of course, but it would help if the second parent could work part time and full time, pay taxes instead of sitting at home with the baby.

I think most already work two jobs already so I don't see taxable income going up much to balance it.

I'm not saying things should be free - but a well balanced user fee structure would be needed. What if it's not $10/day, may be it's $12 or $15. Not saying it should be $17/month like in France, the research needs to be done and number have to be crunched. But I still think it's quite important.

Perhaps a tiered system may be of benefit, but one already does somewhat exist through low income subsidies for daycare, I think many feel they deserve it as well instead of making other sacrifices. I've saw my tax receipt for 2012 already and know that that could have bought some cool stuff, however I'll be happy with the increased tax refund it brings at least since daycare was my choice not my right.

[Captain Awesome]

In some ways I think our health system should be a tad less universal as well with those able to paying a little more as well.....at least in premiums. Our premiums are rediculously cheap compared to the cost of service and again, no premiums at all for low income situations. And all that coming from a big C conservative.

Yes, our premiums are quite cheap. That's why I'm not advocating free childcare or $17/month child care (crap, why did I even mention it?), I'm simply advocating the idea. Idea comes first, numbers come second. I think idea is great (I guess we disagree on this), and numbers should make sense also.

[goatboy]

We live in a modern society. The government has a social contract with its citizens.

What is the point of having rulers if they do not provide for their citizens?

Welcome to modern humanity.

It's not the rulers who provide for their citizens though, is it? It's you and me (assuming you are a contributor and not just a taker)

“You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.”
― Winston Churchill

[goatboy]

Yes, our premiums are quite cheap. That's why I'm not advocating free childcare or $17/month child care (crap, why did I even mention it?), I'm simply advocating the idea. Idea comes first, numbers come second. I think idea is great (I guess we disagree on this), and numbers should make sense also.

The bottom line on any type of thinking like this is that if the end user doesn't;t pay the full cost of something, then the difference is paid for by someone else? Where does this stop? Sure, we'd all like subsidized (fill in the blank), but in the end, where does that subsidy come from? I think the idea of free ice cream for everyone is a good idea, the problem is the numbers will never work.

The only way subsidized daycare would work is if an employer subsidized it in an effort to recruit and maintain good employee's so that they stand apart from the rest of the employers. If it's legislated and its an even playing field, then we all pay again.

[SurplusElect]

It's not the rulers who provide for their citizens though, is it?

You foot the entire bill for your portion of use of Canada's roads, schools, airports and government services - or are you able to enjoy them because collectively we get more for our money when we all chip in?

[Captain Awesome]

I think the idea of free ice cream for everyone is a good idea, the problem is the numbers will never work.

Nobody is saying "free" - please don't throw in idiotic ideas like this otherwise it's hard to have a meaningful conversation with you. I believe the word is "subsidized" or "partially publicly funded". A lot of things around us are partially publicly funded because it's the right thing to do and it benefits the nation on many levels. Post secondary education is partially publicly funded with students paying a portion of it. Health care is partially funded with user fees. Parks are partially funded with user fees. Road maintenance is partially funded through gasoline taxes. Why all of those things are publicly funded? Because they benefit us. Should child care be one of those items? Yes, I believe so. How much should be funded through taxes and how much should be user fees? That's where number crunching begins.

[goatboy]

You foot the entire bill for your portion of use of Canada's roads, schools, airports and government services - or are you able to enjoy them because collectively we get more for our money when we all chip in?

Well, seeing as we have a pretty hefty gas tax, airport improvement fee and various other fee's that are all user pay, I'd say that I pay a higher portion of their operating costs than someone who only owns a bike and never flies. I've never collected welfare, EI or Workers Compensation, so have paid for something I've never used. I'm not complaining about that, it's part of why I want to live in Canada, so that I know there's an emergency blanket available to me if catastrophe should ever happen. I also don't have a problem paying taxes to support a vibrant, economically sound country to live in, I just have a problem getting burdened to pay for a plethora of things that could be called discretionary and not necessary.

Just wondering what bracket you fall into? Are you a contributor or a user?

[SurplusElect]

Well, seeing as we have a pretty hefty gas tax, airport improvement fee and various other fee's that are all user pay, I'd say that I pay a higher portion of their operating costs than someone who only owns a bike and never flies. I've never collected welfare, EI or Workers Compensation, so have paid for something I've never used.
Just wondering what bracket you fall into? Are you a contributor or a user?

Who protects you at night? Who protects your country from attack? Who regulates safety on motorcycles and helmets? How do the parts for your motorbike get to you - air or by sea? Who regulates the ports? How much did it cost to get you a grade 12 education? Who regulates safety for the toys you played with as a child? Ect ect ect.

We all contribute, because we all use.

I just have a problem getting burdened to pay for a plethora of things that could be called discretionary and not necessary.

Breeding is not discretionary for the survival of the species.

[Veovis]

You foot the entire bill for your portion of use of Canada's roads, schools, airports and government services - or are you able to enjoy them because collectively we get more for our money when we all chip in?

And roads are paid and paid for over a very long period of time. Your specific kids care, or your specific doctor visit is paid immediately and not covered by many over a long time. It's a completely different comparison.

And your idea that free daycare will somehow allow enough breeding to prevent human extinction is quite the overstatement.

Yes, our premiums are quite cheap. That's why I'm not advocating free childcare or $17/month child care (crap, why did I even mention it?), I'm simply advocating the idea. Idea comes first, numbers come second. I think idea is great (I guess we disagree on this), and numbers should make sense also.

I agree with you here. The idea is wonderful, it really is, however in current economic realities, it's not a possibility, too many other systems are bleeding and black holes for public funds that until we even develop better more efficient systems how can we dream of adding more. However, I do like the IDEA, of free or at least very cheap daycare. I also love the idea of a stay at home parent even better, but that isn't a current reality either.

The fact is the IDEA of buying a boat is nice too but many do that and figure the numbers after and find that the government should be picking up the tab for other things so they can afford their boat.

[goatboy]

We all contribute, because we all use.


Breeding is not discretionary for the survival of the species.

You contribute if you pay taxes, otherwise you're a user.

Breeding if you cannot afford to raise your children is irresponsible and should not be my responsibility. Our species will not become extinct because we don't subsidize daycare. However, we may have less Honey Boo Boo's.

Do you contribute your fair share of money to support your vision?

[SurplusElect]

Do you contribute your fair share of money to support your vision?

What would satisfy you?

Want me to post last years tax files to satisfy your assumptions that I'm a "user"?

LOL. Moving on...

[SurplusElect]

And your idea that free daycare will somehow allow enough breeding to prevent human extinction is quite the overstatement.

Captain Awesome has already identified that our 1.5 fertility rate means Canada's natural population is shrinking.

[Veovis]

And

Captain Awesome has already identified that our 1.5 fertility rate means Canada's natural population is shrinking.

That doesn't mean the human race is going extinct. IN fact the rate of which global population exists, having people cut back is wonderful. We will run out of room otherwise. Luckily we live in a country where immigration is welcomed and all cultures can be accepted so we can allow more people in before we go extinct.

[goatboy]

Yes, our premiums are quite cheap. That's why I'm not advocating free childcare or $17/month child care (crap, why did I even mention it?), I'm simply advocating the idea. Idea comes first, numbers come second. I think idea is great (I guess we disagree on this), and numbers should make sense also.

Here's one number to remember. $1.6 BILLION. Quebec subsidized childcare cost.

[logicalview]

Here's one number to remember. $1.6 BILLION. Quebec subsidized childcare cost.

And the only way Quebec can afford to do that is because the rest of us pour money into Quebec in equalization. Take away Quebec's ability to suck the rest of Canada dry, and all of their unaffordable and unsustainable social programs go extinct over night.