Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
"well, you made some choices here, and if that costs you more money, that's on you."
|
As someone without kids, and following along that line of thinking, I'm initially opposed to the idea.
With that said, don't base you opinions off the lowest common denominator. Not everyone is getting knocked up unexpectedly with their 8th kid with the 5th different daddy.
Some people chose to have kids, and made the realization (probably before) that it made more sense to have a single-income household due to things like childcare costs. Does it overall hurt losing part of the workforce due to this?
Others might have made the choice understanding that it would have long-term financial impacts keeping them in poverty. But really for us to judge them for doing so is pretty dystopian.
They're poor, have single-income or dual-income but paying childcare costs on low-income, keeping them in poverty. We subsidize them in other areas anyways, but that kid grows up to be poor because it's hard to get out of the cycle when he can't go to University when he turns 18, instead he's already been working since he was 14 at a minimum wage job to help pay the bills and school is secondary to getting food on the table. He grows up, in poverty, and has kids. It repeats. If something like subsidized daycare can break the cycle, it's worth it.
And then what of the people who made the choice not to have kids in part because of childcare costs? Fertility rates are down 4%. At one point it becomes unsustainable (without immigration as stated).
https://globalnews.ca/news/4957286/a...aby-boom-over/
Just ask yourself if the policy is best for Alberta, not whether or not we should continue to punish those who made (what we deem) poor choices.