re: Is child care/daycare innately expensive? What can society do to reduce *cost* of it?

quote:

---

Is child care/daycare innately expensive? What can society do to reduce *cost* of it?

---

Overhead, for one, but I've always said there's 3 business models that if you can break into them, you can move anywhere in the country and be in business on day 1 because you've cornered a demand base so large that every human not only wants it, but needs it: cutting hair, funeral homes, and daycare.

With daycare, with a good reputation, you can just about name your price and people will pay it, and in many cases where you're a monopoly in an area, they have to pay it. Friend of mine was in the beltway paying over $2500/month for one child and that's the only place they could get in. It's inherently expensive because of overhead and the supply and demand and its irreplaceability: You're paying for a replacement parent for the allotted time you need it. You can't kennel them like a dog and head to work, so it's going to be expensive.

quote:

---

NYC’s plan to essentially cover 100% of the costs for families with young children

---

Without even more socialist policies to cap the free market's ability to raise prices, this will only increase prices, and fast. The problem with capping prices is you'll wind up with people leaving the industry and wind up with the lowest common denominator taking up the slack, i.e., the government, private equity, fraudsters and schemers, cheapskates etc. Do you want to leave your kids with that demographic? That's the problem with socialist policies (orher than the fact they always fail and lead to societal collapse and millions dead): it's a slow creep to totalitarianism until it's not, and nobody wants to pay for it because it's slavery with a fancy, edgy name slapped on it.

There's always simple answers to these supposedly complex problems a bloated government has created. One is licensure and barrier to entry stifles competition, but there's another fix that's simple, and that's that mothers in the home are the simple fix (simple doesn't mean "easy" or "quick fix"). We're just now getting to the point where having a parent in the home full time is starting to make more sense financially and schedule-wise for more and more people than it used to. It's why the notion has become far more palatable even for the most "boss" of boss babes who have commone sense, logic and a realistic view of the average American family's options when comparing single parent to no parent in the home raising the kids instead of a daycare - and that's fantastic, because it's the most noble of professions that a polite, organized and stable society can rely on.

I assure you, more bloated government police state intervention will not the solve the problem. It never has, but alas, there's always plenty of morons who think it will work "this" time.

Go back to single income homes.

if i owned a daycare and heard the government was going to subsidize it i would dramatically raise the price lmao

quote:

---

What govt pays for foster care kids and subsidizes others is what sets the price.


My wife was in charge of the Foster Child day care of Alaska, what was paid was absolutely incredible.

---

The foster system in AK is fuuuuuuuuuuuuuubbbbbbbbaaaaaaaarrrrrrr

But man those families that do adopt (particularly special needs kids) make bank from the government.

quote:

---

is it worth it for a woman to give up a six figure income to be a stay at home mom?

---

Bunch of women on YouTube and TikTok these days trying to preach this message to young women that it absolutely is better to give up the salary.

quote:

---

is it worth it for a woman to give up a six figure income to be a stay at home mom?

---

Mine did. It's unquestionably been worth it. That said, I made a few bets on my career a few years ago that hit the bullseye, so we don't need the income.

Except, for the lowest earners, the so-called "traditional family model" of SAHM and working father has never existed for most of the people to whom it is prescribed. Married poor women have always had to take up some kind of job that would help the family stay alive. In years past, this often took the form of work that could be done in and around the house to be sure (textile cleaning/working, for example) but has included work outside the house (cleaning houses, farm work, etc.)

The "traditional family model" has always been a mark of the middle class and upwards, and the margins between classes are thinner than ever these days.

If you look at cost per hour daycare is very cheap. We used to pay $125 a week for an awesome daycare at a church. Moved and the new one was $160. Then $180. It sucked to pay it but for $4 an hour it’s tough to say it’s expensive.

The answer is to have mom at home to take care of the kids.

That's never ever discussed.