‘Free’ child care
Discussion
Watching a BBC news article this morning about ‘free’ childcare for working families.
They interviewed several people who said things like “it should be free for everyone” and the “ the government should pay more”.
Do we need to get away from this idea of ‘free’ and ‘the government paying for stuff’ (particularly in news reports) IMO it is misleading and iscontributing to people abusing services (like the NHS etc).
Nothing is ‘free’ and the government has no money of it’s own.
All money comes from the taxpayer (particularly the net tax payer) - or we as a country borrow money, thereby increasing the national debt.
They interviewed several people who said things like “it should be free for everyone” and the “ the government should pay more”.
Do we need to get away from this idea of ‘free’ and ‘the government paying for stuff’ (particularly in news reports) IMO it is misleading and iscontributing to people abusing services (like the NHS etc).
Nothing is ‘free’ and the government has no money of it’s own.
All money comes from the taxpayer (particularly the net tax payer) - or we as a country borrow money, thereby increasing the national debt.
Because the more free or subsidised childcare there is the more people can work, therefore pay tax. Childcare fees are the equivalent to a fairly well paid job so a lot of people feel it’s not worth working for effectively nothing so they don’t, therefore paying no tax at all, which isn’t beneficial to anyone.
matt666 said:
Because the more free or subsidised childcare there is the more people can work, therefore pay tax. Childcare fees are the equivalent to a fairly well paid job so a lot of people feel it’s not worth working for effectively nothing so they don’t, therefore paying no tax at all, which isn’t beneficial to anyone.
So it would be better if they didn't have kids, then they could work and pay tax, and there would be less drain on society, yes?daddy cool said:
matt666 said:
Because the more free or subsidised childcare there is the more people can work, therefore pay tax. Childcare fees are the equivalent to a fairly well paid job so a lot of people feel it’s not worth working for effectively nothing so they don’t, therefore paying no tax at all, which isn’t beneficial to anyone.
So it would be better if they didn't have kids, then they could work and pay tax, and there would be less drain on society, yes?matt666 said:
Because the more free or subsidised childcare there is the more people can work, therefore pay tax. Childcare fees are the equivalent to a fairly well paid job so a lot of people feel it’s not worth working for effectively nothing so they don’t, therefore paying no tax at all, which isn’t beneficial to anyone.
On the contrary, if they don't work and have time to look after their children it's better for their children which in the long run is better for everyone.kiethton said:
although children are a drain for the first 18 years years or so (and the majority will be over their whole life time looking at recent figures) you need children to work in the future to pay the social care bills of their parents....
Nah, we just need workers.Can't we import them as adults rather than breed them?
This is a difficult one, childcare is genuinely eye wateringly expensive. A local nursery near me for a full time place would run you to £910 per month. That is far from insubstantial, in fact it is more than my current mortgage (imagine if you had twins). Thus it is of absolutely no surprise to me that so many people leave work as a result and lean on the system.
When we consider the number of people who quit work/go part time and never change as a result of this, I would like to see a study into the effect of assistance to allow people to stay in full time work and thus keep furthering their career path and equally what the greater drain on the public purse is - childcare support until school age (4-5 years) vs tax credits/benefits for the next 18+ years.
I realise there are knobs and levers around the various tax credits and some employers have voucher schemes but it doesn't change the overall situation significantly.
When we consider the number of people who quit work/go part time and never change as a result of this, I would like to see a study into the effect of assistance to allow people to stay in full time work and thus keep furthering their career path and equally what the greater drain on the public purse is - childcare support until school age (4-5 years) vs tax credits/benefits for the next 18+ years.
I realise there are knobs and levers around the various tax credits and some employers have voucher schemes but it doesn't change the overall situation significantly.
matt666 said:
Because the more free or subsidised childcare there is the more people can work, therefore pay tax. Childcare fees are the equivalent to a fairly well paid job so a lot of people feel it’s not worth working for effectively nothing so they don’t, therefore paying no tax at all, which isn’t beneficial to anyone.
My post wasnt about childcare per-se, more about the concept of it being ‘free’.
Even if somebody us able to work due to having access to this ‘free’ childcare - unless the pay more in tax than the childcare costs, then it’s still other tax payers picking up the tab.
Of course there may be other considerations/advantages to people being in work other than the btoom line tax take - but that’s probably for another discussion.
wc98 said:
speaking of "free" money . one of the charities is running a tv advert at the moment that says the government will "double your donation at no extra cost to yourself" if you donate before a certain cut off date. no mention of where the government gets the money from.
Exactly the type of thing i’m talking about. It does cost you either in terms of your personal tax or in reduced public services.Nothing is ‘free’.
Our nursery don't refer to it as free. They correctly refer to it as "Government Funded Hours". Although it is "free" at the point of delivery to us we pay a monthly amount as the funded hours only cover term time and don't cover food. So the nursery calculate the total annual amount we would pay, subtract the government funding then charge the rest evenly over the year. As we were paying the full cost before I'm personally more than happy to get some of my tax back in the form of this subsidy!
Moonhawk said:
My post wasnt about childcare per-se, more about the concept of it being ‘free’.
Even if somebody us able to work due to having access to this ‘free’ childcare - unless the pay more in tax than the childcare costs, then it’s still other tax payers picking up the tab.
Of course there may be other considerations/advantages to people being in work other than the btoom line tax take - but that’s probably for another discussion.
A fair chunk of the money that gets paid to the nursery by government will be recycled into the economy to the broader benefit of society.
This ‘free’ childcare policy is going to have ramifications. The so called free hours are at a very low rate far lower than a nursery would charge yet minimum wage goes up and profits go down. It won’t be long until settings all turn around and say no we’re not offering it as they can’t cover their costs. Watch them moan then.
Moonhawk said:
Exactly the type of thing i’m talking about. It does cost you either in terms of your personal tax or in reduced public services.
Nothing is ‘free’.
Well indeed, and yet every time you hear about something in the UK that could be better - transport, education, healthcare, childcare, the justice system, you name it - the cry is "more funding" and "the government (or "they") should spend more on this".Nothing is ‘free’.
And if you're of a Corbyn persuasion, you just say "oh, the rich will pay for all that". If you have never experienced a Labour government you might also say "we are the 6th richest country in the world, we can simply borrow the money."
Higher spending? Yes please. Who pays? Not my problem pal.
BoRED S2upid said:
This ‘free’ childcare policy is going to have ramifications. The so called free hours are at a very low rate far lower than a nursery would charge yet minimum wage goes up and profits go down. It won’t be long until settings all turn around and say no we’re not offering it as they can’t cover their costs. Watch them moan then.
This, my fiance is a nursery school practitioner. Her nursery school does not offer free hours, its totally private. This is not uncommon, my best mate's mum owned a chain of nursery schools, they didn't offer the government hours either.Thing is the staff members are not well paid. My fiance has worked in nursery schools for 6 years now following being made redundant from a local government under 5's SEN support caseworker role. She is fairly senior (one level below management) and manages a small team of 4. She needs a formal qualification to do her job, has taken additional responsibility (company SENCO) and still earns less than she would delivering groceries for Tesco or stacking shelves at Lidl, the majority of those below her are on the respective minimum wages for their age. I guess like many care roles salaries do not accurately reflect the demands of the job (I wouldn't/couldn't work with 15 screaming 18 month old kids every day and get paid multiples of what she does).
Thing is, if we ever had kids I doubt she be working, after paying for the above fees (+£1,000 pm), even with staff discount she'd take home less than £300 - hardly worth it tbh.
vonuber said:
We pay £2100/month in nursery fees for our two kids under 3.
We had a long discussion about whether it was worth the other half going back to work, or if she did me quitting.
My wife's entire salary is wiped out by nursery fees. She basically works full time for nothing other than keeping her skills current so she still has a career when the kids are school age. Although we'll still need to pay for pre-school and afterschool clubs then, so won't be any better off.We had a long discussion about whether it was worth the other half going back to work, or if she did me quitting.
Government funded hours count for SFA in the grand scheme of things. It infuriates me the way they keep banging on about free childcare, which to anyone without kids sounds like parents are getting a free ride, while anyone with kids knows it's next to useless.
We're not even that badly off compared to some friends, who have opted to have one parent at home because the sums don't add up. There's simply no option for them, except to ditch one career. It's a national scandal, or should be!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff