The Clinton plan for child care could really help young working families

[Peacetrain]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-clinton-pledging-10-percent-income-cap-families-184227354.html?ref=gs

I know so many young working families who are being kept down by the overwhelming costs of child care.. so much so that sometimes one of the parents staying home with the kids is more cost effective.. but so hard to get ahead these days with just one parent working.. or the single parent having to spend almost half their income on child care..

[scscholar]

1. But the breeders know before they decided to breed...

that child care costs money. So, normal people are now supposed to pay for their decision? I have no friends with one of those things because I associated with educated people.

[Peacetrain]

2. Good grief.. what the heck is a breeder? your post makes no sense

[scscholar]

4. Come to Seattle...

where you can go days without seeing a child. Over the entire city, dogs outnumber children almost 3:2. And, we're the most educated city in the country.

[Kittycat]

10. What does dogs have to do with the rising cost of

Childcare? FFS! Im no fan of HRC, and don't think her plans go far enough to address the poor or working class hurt by greed. But comments like this just have no place here.

[Thinkingabout]

6. Hum, wonder if poster's parents was "breeders".

[Human101948]

7. Slur used by gays against heterosexuals, kind of dated....

Maybe used humorously in this case.

[Kittycat]

5. WTF?!?!! I think you mistake DU for Freeperville

[Starry Messenger]

8. You seem nice.

[Haveadream]

22. Bwahahahaha

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. Wow ... Really?

[BootinUp]

16. I need to take a break, cause I couldn't have read that right. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. Nope ... You read that right; but, it is not you that needs the break.

[scscholar]

20. Sorry, I was too harsh

But a lot of people are tired of paying for all of those religious people that have so many kids.

[Prism]

24. "breeders" may only be invoked if there's a funny comment following

It's the rules gay folk established when we invented the word.

So, you kind of failed there.

I would have accepted "crotch fruit" as well.

(I know it's horrible. Still cracks me up)

[scscholar]

26. So you would find the phrase...

"Clinton plan for crotch fruit" amusing?

[Prism]

31. Absolutely

I just snorted afternoon rum through my nose just reading your post. There's something about that phrase that is standalone hilarious.

Again, I know it's awful. Still funny.

[greatauntoftriplets]

30. Oy.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Yes, it is a big help to those parents who are trying to work to have child care.

[Peacetrain]

9. In my little part of Iowa.. it is the thing that is holding so many young people back

we focus on educational costs.. and that is true..but on a day to day basis.. the cost of child care is killing them..this is such a simple solution that could make a great impact..

[Thinkingabout]

14. I realize younger people may not be thinking about getting SS later but it is figured

On the highest thirty five years of earnings and if not thirty five years of earnings then whatever the earnings then it is still divided by thirty five.

[Peacetrain]

17. And if you have a parent who has to stay home..

because of child care costs..that impacts their SS in the long run.. over the course of years.. plus day care providers do not get a living wage.. it is so circular.. I know people are going to yell their heads off.. but really good day care should be federally subsidized so that working people can actually start to get a head a little.. and day care providers/teachers get paid a decent living..

[Thinkingabout]

25. Yes it is.

[Recursion]

34. O'Malley had a great proposal to treat 5 years of child or elder care

as years worked at your mean annual income for purposes of determining SS and Medicare benefits.

I really hope the eventual nominee picks up that plan.

[puffy socks]

12. Indeed.

Child care is a huge expense especially for single parents.

"The benefits would be offered to families on a "sliding scale" based on need, but Clinton didn't provide an estimate of its cost. Ahead of Kentucky's primary on May 17, she said a family in the state where both parents earn minimum wage spends about 20 percent of their income on child care. For single parents earning the minimum wage, that expense rises to 40 percent she said..."


40% of a minimum wage for a single parent. That is outrageous. How is that a living wage?

[Peacetrain]

13. That is just mind boggling isn't it

[puffy socks]

28. Yes it is.

I really believe capitalism has been so perverted it's all about keeping people desperate so they'll work for cheap.
Corporations do all they can to shove their costs onto the taxpayers at every turn.
Walmart paying people low low wages and then turning them toward TANF and snap which they then make more money off of as they use their employee discounts for shopping.

Businesses using our court system as a way to get out of their contractual obligations while forcing their customers and employees to subvert the court system and have their binding arbitrators deal with customers who want to go to court to be compensated for fraud etc.

State Farm with Katrina, Exxon Valdez. Nearly every contract now states that the company can changed the contract at any time for any reason, the customers and employees are bound by the terms set forth by these companies. Verizon , Bank of America.


So many issues intertwined with our lives that dismantling it is going to be difficult. Unintended consequences are sure to hit some people hard. It's going to take years and lots of persistence to get things changed for the better after so many decades of following trickle down economics.


So much of this is true, some a little over the top but for the most part I agree with it.

Right-Wing Ideology in a Nutshell

When you cut right through it, right-wing ideology is just "dime-store economics" - intended to dress their ideology up and make it look respectable. You don't really need to know much about economics to understand it. They certainly don't. It all gets down to two simple words.

"Cheap labor". That's their whole philosophy in a nutshell - which gives you a short and pithy "catch phrase" that describes them perfectly. You've heard of "big-government liberals". Well they're "cheap-labor conservatives".

"Cheap-labor conservative" is a moniker they will never shake, and never live down. Because it's exactly what they are. You see, cheap-labor conservatives are defenders of corporate America - whose fortunes depend on labor. The larger the labor supply, the cheaper it is. The more desperately you need a job, the cheaper you'll work, and the more power those "corporate lords" have over you. If you are a wealthy elite - or a "wannabe" like most dittoheads - your wealth, power and privilege is enhanced by a labor pool, forced to work cheap.

Don't believe me. Well, let's apply this principle, and see how many right-wing positions become instantly understandable.

Cheap-labor conservatives don't like social spending or our "safety net". Why. Because when you're unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like - which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you "over a barrel" and in a position to "work cheap or starve".

Cheap-labor conservatives don't like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why. These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you "over a barrel".

Cheap-labor conservatives like "free trade", NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why. Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world, who are "over a barrel", and will work cheap.

Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman's right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women "over a barrel", forcing them to work cheap.

Cheap-labor conservatives don't like unions. Why. Because when labor "sticks together", wages go up. That's why workers unionize. Seems workers don't like being "over a barrel".

Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about "morality", "virtue", "respect for authority", "hard work" and other "values". Why. So they can blame your being "over a barrel" on your own "immorality", lack of "values" and "poor choices".

Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry among wage earners distracts them, and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.

The Cheap-Labor Conservatives' "Dirty Secret": They Don't Really Like Prosperity

http://sideshow.me.uk/annex/defeattherightin3minutes.htm

[arcane1]

15. "Exactly how Clinton's program would work is still unclear."

"Clinton didn't provide an estimate of its cost"

Sounds like more feel-good pandering to me.

[Prism]

27. Is it, dare I say . . . pie in the sky?

I mean, it's a good idea. I'm all for it. But every time Bernie says anything, "HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

How comes parents get free stuff!!!!!!?????

[bkkyosemite]

19. And Bernie's plan would help even more so.

[My Good Babushka]

21. I was in this same discussion this morning

Instead of subsidizing the parent's wages, then childcare workers' wages, then a subsidy for procuring childcare, it would make more sense to give a stipend to the parent caregiver for preschool age children. Private companies will be getting the majority of the benefit of the several subsidies to help just one child. This is about providing just enough subsidies so that profits will be preserved at the highest levels and families won't be much better off. We have to start asking why can't we ever help people directly without making sure some business is taking a big bite out of it.

[Prism]

29. You mean like an IHSS system for child care?

I could actually grok that. And you're right, it'd be more cost effective. It would cut out several middlemen.

[My Good Babushka]

33. I just mean money, to the in-home parent

you don't need a system or a business or extra subsidized employees.
All these subsidies that keep two parents working just to afford child care are nuts. They benefit businesses, not families. If homemaking and childcare is work, then pay it.

[riderinthestorm]

23. It relies on tax hikes for tax payers and tax credits for families

Neither are feasible (talk about Bernie's unicorns )

Clinton intends to accomplish the 10 percent cap with tax credits and subsidized child care, according to her campaign. Details on how the plan would be funded and executed will come later this year, aides said.

Ah so there it is. Instead of child care becoming cheaper there will be a change in who pays for child care. Rather than it being parents of children who pay for their children’s care it will be the general taxpayer. Again, this could indeed be a good idea but it’s simply not the same as making child care cheaper, is it?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/05/13/hillary-clintons-excellent-plan-reduce-the-cost-of-child-care-by-paying-child-carers-more/#2fe01bff5ef2

Everyone is slamming Bernie for raising taxes and here's Clinton proposing raising taxes. How many struggling families can afford to pay childcare costs upfront and then wait for a tax credit? That's really tough and not at all persuasive.

Bernie’s plan to fully fund Headstart for example is paid for with the same EFT taxes that would fund his tuition proposal. I believe that's far more effective.

[snowy owl]

32. Another thank you from Hillary supporters to Bernie.