Child vouchers ... 'unfair to stay at home parents'?

Discussion in 'Politics & The Economy' started by pragmatic, Aug 4, 2013.

  1. pragmatic

    pragmatic
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    12,150
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,647
    I don't understand ... do families where a parent stays at home want to be paid to stay at home and look after their kids, or just spiteful that families with both working parents are getting a benefit they are not?

    I'm not saying anything on the actual proposal itself, rather this attitude that is being displayed.

    Maybe this is a thread for GC rather than P&E.
     
  2. Bl4ckGryph0n

    Bl4ckGryph0n
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    42,848
    Products Owned:
    11
    Products Wanted:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    ::1/128
    Ratings:
    +16,262
    I'm in the unfair camp. And to me it is core to what is wrong with the system. No need for all these benefits. Perhaps if there was a big need in the workforce for more people then yes as a possible temporary stimulant. However surely we have current no need for such stimulant.
     
  3. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Tax payer subsidies as usual. Mostly due to the idiotic over regulation of the child care industry no doubt to benefit companies like Busy Bees. More rent seeking. No change there.
     
  4. pragmatic

    pragmatic
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    12,150
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,647
    How can it be unfair, someone not working in this instance is a choice, often to save money although maybe not in your instance dejogji.

    People shouldn't choose to stay at home and the state also pays for childcare, surely the reason they are at home is because they are the childcare.
     
  5. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    I agree, but that doesn't mean they should also be subsidised. If I understand DJs point, its that there should be no benefits or subsidies. The choice is in having the children in the first place.

    The benefits/subsidies are allowing an over priced / over regulated care industry to exist. Effectively a parallel public service and the increasing regulation has driven the competition out of business. A stay at home parent should be fine to look after a few other children and make some money from doing so, but if they don't have a degree in child psychology, have a full time nurse on hand, 2 acres of soft play areas, child specific toilets and washrooms, fire safety and pay tax, insurance, minimum wage etc etc then they cannot do so.

    Those increasing regulations will have been proposed and lobbied for by the big child care companies that can afford to do what a mum in a semi has no chance of doing. It has effectively outlawed in home child care and benefitted the big companies which require child care voucher systems that subsidise the better off.
     
  6. Bl4ckGryph0n

    Bl4ckGryph0n
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    42,848
    Products Owned:
    11
    Products Wanted:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    ::1/128
    Ratings:
    +16,262
    I wasn't saying that stay at home mum's should get them as well. Not at all. The whole concept is daft and most people are calling for it. That state takes money away and then gives paft of it back in areas where they choose.

    As I said, if they do it from a policy perspective to encourage something fair enough. For a temporary period that can be good. However I doubt that we need a stimulant at the moment to ensure both parents are working do we? In affect one could argue that current the stimulant should be in an area that encourages one parent to stay at home.

    Beyond that the big picture is two fold;
    1. As karkus stated as per usual the side effects of these scenarios is that it creates inequality in the market place. Not good at all.
    2. Personal responsibility. Like with many other benefits and services they've been creating a dependency making people belief they cannot do without. And unfortunately a large majority can't even see the root cause for it any longer.

    I find it really sad.
     
  7. Ruperts slippers

    Ruperts slippers
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,241
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +4,252
    He said: ‘This Government is on the side of people who want to work hard and get on in life. Tax-free childcare will help working parents by giving them more choice and better access to the quality, affordable childcare they need.’

    I think certain individuals are getting there knickers in a twist over the get on in life part of what Osbourne allegedly said....Personally I don't think it's worth getting in a tis over..
     
  8. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Ah the Government is on the side of goodness, cleanliness, godliness too. The best way of helping would be to scrap the regulations and vouchers. I'm struggling to understand why those earning up to 300K per annum should be helped by other tax payers to subsidise personal lifestyle and choice.

    I wonder if I bought a Ferrari to commute, that the tax payer could fork out for the inconvenience of extra security, high servicing costs, insurance, taxation and fuel consumption. What about a helicopter and free lessons at tax payers expense ?
     
  9. NewMan

    NewMan
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,276
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +890
    I saw the woman on BBC Breakfast this morning using empassioned terms like "full-time mum" and "I 'sacrificed' a salary to stay at home" as if she's some kind of martyr, in an attempt to justify her complaining that someone might be getting something she isn't...

    Ultimately, if you pay for childcare, you get the tax relief, if you don't, you don't. That's about as discriminatory as not giving me tax relief on childcare (I have no children, if you were wondering).
     
  10. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    But she is providing childcare. The question is really the wrong way around. Why should anyone be getting benefits to look after their own kids ?
     
  11. Bl4ckGryph0n

    Bl4ckGryph0n
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    42,848
    Products Owned:
    11
    Products Wanted:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    ::1/128
    Ratings:
    +16,262
    Exactly that is the whole point, I'm all up for stimulants but is this one required at this moment in time. No I don't think so, in five years time when the economy is booming and we can't see we can't get the employees perhaps it could be employed as a stimulant.
     
  12. NewMan

    NewMan
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,276
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +890
    No she isn't. Childcare is a strictly regulated business involving trained, registered professionals. The same stringent rules, regulations and training don't apply to parenting, sadly.

    Though I agree, nobody should be given benefits to look after their own kids - that's the point I was actually trying to make.
     
  13. pragmatic

    pragmatic
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    12,150
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,647
    The practical reason for this is simple, both parents work as it would be unaffordable for either of them to stay at home (rising cost of living etc), but at the same time child care takes most the income from one of the earners and we want an economy with more people working ... so by providing a tax credit or whatever this is branded as it is supporting families with parents who are both working and probably struggling.

    Now the reality is very different, and my ask to not go into that was ruefully ignored, this will just push up childcare costs while providing a temporary relieve to the target families. Giving it to a maximum income of £300k seems to be a bit rich, but the greater side is if a family has a very high earner and a lower earner say £155k and £25k, then the government is effectively saying the £30k earner should stay at home ... While a pair of earners at £90k each would pay less tax, have the same pretax income and also receive this benefit.

    The government really needs to grapple household income, this is a reoccurring error on their side, among others on this issue ...

    As for stay at home parents, it was your personal choice to stay at home, so no you will not get a state hand out for childcare you lazy bastards ... were not paying for nanny's while you natter on mums net and pop down to Costa.
     
  14. Pecker

    Pecker
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    22,494
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Huddersfield, People's Republic of Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,612
    Gaz, I suspect most stay at home mums aren't opposed to child care vouchers, or even give the rights and wrongs of the system a second thought.

    Some people are politically opposed to the system and it suits a purpose to stick a stay at home mum on the telly to discuss the injustice of it all, just as it suits to put a hard working career mum on the telly to put the other side.

    In reality I suspect 99% of parents look at their salaries, look at the vouchers, look at the cost if child care, then do what's best for them, rather than basing their decision on any political and/or moral imperative.

    Steve W
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
  15. Ruperts slippers

    Ruperts slippers
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,241
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +4,252
    Why do we want more people working, who's WE?
     
  16. Pecker

    Pecker
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    22,494
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Huddersfield, People's Republic of Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,612
    Society.

    If France, Germany, Japan, the USA and China have most couples where both partners work, and we have a significant number of couples where the mums are housewives, we'll be less productive as a nation.

    This is reflected by the fact that, in a time if financial austerity, where the government is trying to cut back public expenditure as far as possible, the government is proposing this.

    They think we'll get the money back and far more.

    Steve W
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
  17. Bl4ckGryph0n

    Bl4ckGryph0n
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    42,848
    Products Owned:
    11
    Products Wanted:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    ::1/128
    Ratings:
    +16,262
    So are you saying we have an under supply in workers for companies? Are you saying the government really need to stimulate families have dual workers because there aren't enough potential employees about for employers?

    I'd argue that currently there is no need for such stimulants. And then in the detail the market will restore itself in child care costs as there will be less demand (not least subsidy) making it automatically more attractive for some who want to go back to work to do so. And so on. The market will work and find its natural level without artificial interference through stimulants that are not required. If so they could be brought back temporarily in time to kick start the process.
     
  18. Ruperts slippers

    Ruperts slippers
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,241
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +4,252
    But surely it's down to individual families to choose whether one or two parents work, not society, and those that choose not to work shouldn't be castigated by policy or other parents....I find it a bit odd people have children and then want someone else to bring them up...
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2013
  19. tapzilla2k

    tapzilla2k
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    7,585
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Oxford
    Ratings:
    +2,812
    I think the only exception to that should be towards parents who look after severely disabled children. My mum was a child minder for a number of years, however she got out of it due to the never ending changes in regulations and so on. My mum stayed at home to look after me and my siblings while my dad worked hard. At one point they had to make do with my dad's redundancy pay and child benefit, until my dad got another job. That was back in the glory days of Thatcherism (just one of many reasons as to why he won't vote for the Tories ever again, he's not too fond of the Unions either). Child benefit when spent on children directly is a good use of money, if it's the difference between being clothed and fed or having to be taken into care because the parents are useless (an extreme example I grant you).

    Either the Government gives every parent child care vouchers or they figure out a way of reducing the costs that does not impair childcare services. I take issue when a Political Party applies ideology to families and divides what help they get depending if they meet the criteria set out by that ideology. All this smacks of is a cheap electoral gimmick designed to buy votes.
     
  20. Pecker

    Pecker
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Messages:
    22,494
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Huddersfield, People's Republic of Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,612
    Yes it is.

    Then it's down to government to look at the situation and decide what's best for the country.

    There's an assumption that, by providing vouchers, the government is making decisions for people. It isn't. It's just responding to a situation.

    The government should let people decide. But the shouldn't then sit with their hands over their eyes shouting LALALALA and ignoring the resultant situation.

    A government reacting and responding to a situation is not the same as removing the responsibility if others.

    Steve W
     
  21. Ruperts slippers

    Ruperts slippers
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,241
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +4,252
    But government involvement in subsidising child care is pushing costs up for everyone, even childless couples or individual tax payers...
     
  22. thedude

    thedude
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    Messages:
    10,162
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Swindon
    Ratings:
    +2,067
    Hold your horses there sunny jims.
    All this talk of stay at home mums.
    I'm in fact a stay st home dad. I do run a business from home albeit a quiet and fairly unsuccessfully. I dont get tax credits because my poor wage props up my wife's. She is a nurse so it's not like we are loaded.
    I don't get any help with child care from the government or housing benefit of anything. The whole system to be honest stinks.
    Why do I look after ny child? Well my wife has a steady income and Im a serial salesman so although I had stonking months it's hard to budget properly where the wife gets a steady income.
    I don't believe in getting someone else to look after my daughter we had her she's our responsibility. Call me old fashioned if you like. We don't pay for child care or get out families to help out.
    Right im off my high horse.
    Now it stinks that in which ever way you look at it the poor benefit from having children the rich can always cope. It's the middle guy like me who suffers.

    No idea of my point in the end other than Facebook was getting boring
     
  23. mikeburns

    mikeburns
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    799
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    Stratford Upon Avon
    Ratings:
    +321
  24. Ruperts slippers

    Ruperts slippers
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,241
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +4,252
    It's the first few years that are the killer cost wise, we worked out for us both to got to work childcare would be somewhere between £12000- £20000..Neither of us have jobs that have set start and finish times making planning nearly impossible...

    So we decided to focus on her career instead and my business interests would tick over 1-2 days a week .. Although the eldest starts preschool in 4 weeks, meaning I'll have the baby 3 days a week and the nans 2 days..
     
  25. mikeburns

    mikeburns
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    799
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    Stratford Upon Avon
    Ratings:
    +321
    There is an under supply of SKILLED workers.

    And if you cant get a job then you wont get the allowance.
     
  26. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    We are struggling for childcare professionals of course. We need more highly paid childcare professionals to keep up with the ever growing number of mothers working in the childcare profession. Its essentially exactly the same as getting paid to look after the children at home but a lot more expensive because of training, qualifications and suitable buildings.

    Next up not doing ironing ourselves and sending all clothing to Government regulated Ironetttes. In another building are the ironing trainees who will soon be working in the Ironetttes for £300 per week. A Ironing regulator is set up to ensure no shoddy ironing gets through such as double creasing. All this helps productivity and creates lots of Ironing jobs and Government departments for highly paid OfIron civil servants. Britain will be crease free.
     
  27. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Oh yeah, they do a terrific job of deciding what's best. Their record is one of outstanding failure, often with many deaths, lots of destruction and mostly abject misery.
     
  28. EarthRod

    EarthRod
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,775
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +7,877
    Cheer up karkus - it might never happen!

    :) :D :laugh:
     
  29. karkus30

    karkus30
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    13,997
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,238
    Oh yeah it does sound a bit 'grumpy old man'. Well you can talk, if you aren't enjoying a glass of German Wine you can be horribly grumpy......usually about my posts ;-) we should continue to remind each other of our continuing slide towards Rick Wakeman and Victor Meldrew levels of intolerance.......I don't beeeeelieeeeve it.
     
  30. EarthRod

    EarthRod
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,775
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +7,877
    There are of course a few other grumpy types on this forum! :)

    But its understandable considering the weak mundane government with its headlining announcements about some tweak to some existing 'thing' (like the childcare voucher 'thing') which won't be implemented until after the next election. I don't beeeeelieeeeve it.

    What a shower of ****.
     

Share This Page

Loading...