You don't understand how economics work if you think this is actually going to be helpful. By providing "universal" child care, you just moved the cost of childcare from the individual to the tax base so now everyone has to pay an ineffifient system that often eats up 30-50% of the incoming money in bureaucratic inneficiencies before it will even reach the child care system.

On top of that the increased taxes are going to raise prices of everything because the businesses don't just eat the cost of taxes, they pass it off to the consumer. So all these families that get free childcare are going to be paying more for their groceries, rent, unilities and everything else.

To top things off, you now have random strangers with no bond with your children looking after them in a ratio of maybe 1:8 or 1:10. So your children are going to be stressed out and anxious and are going to act out both at the childcare place and at home, so you're just going to be getting phone calls all day about your children fighting other children.

All in all, you might feel like you're better off but once you do the math you're at about the same place if not worse off.

▲

sensanaty 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, surely the hyper efficient free market is much better here, not like we have decades of proof of the perverse incentives there. We should instead ensure every mother is crippled with life-long medical debt if their kid needs any help!

Also if we care so much about these inefficiencies, why is it that I still have to subsidize drivers? Why aren't we investing in better public transport infrastructure, rather than letting drivers take up 1000x the space on roads that I'm forced to pay for?

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I don't see any mention of free markets in your post. The healthcare industry is not a free market, they are handicapped by regulatiom and by law are required to provide health insurance to anyone that wants it and cannot reject anyone. Of course prices are going to be stiffling when they have to give you insurance no matter your pre-existing conditions and no matter the choices you make

▲

ericfr11 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I just use my bike: why should I pay taxes for roads maintenance. Unfortunately, a society is not just about economics

▲

EvanAnderson 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I just use my bike: why should I pay taxes for roads maintenance.

Most US states pay for a significant fraction of road maintenance from motor fuel taxes ("road tax"). You probably aren't paying those taxes if you're in the US and you don't buy motor fuel.

Increased EV adoption is likely going to change that regime.

▲

KetoManx64 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You wouldn't have to if the government didn't own the roads. Plenty of examples of this, private companies creating their own roads and charging people a small fee to use them so they can maintain them.

Wouldn't be that hard give people a little device that tracks the roads they use and charges them $0.05 per mile that they drive and then have the company be a co-op that's owned by the people living in that town.

▲

xboxnolifes 2 days ago | parent [-]

Perfect way to introduce new national road middlemen: the tracking device manufacturer, the road geolabeling software company, and each road owner.

A local co-op would never last. If it could, we'd see far more local co-ops.

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		It's hard to compete against multinational conglomerates that get tax cuts and tax breaks left and right, but they do exist, eh: REI, Ace Hardware, Land O' Lakes.

▲

nemomarx 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You could say all of this about public schooling, but that one worked out.

▲

KetoManx64 2 days ago | parent [-]

It has not at all. 20% of high school graduates are reading at a 5th grade level, which when you consider the billions of dollars poured into public schools every year is just asinine https://www.abtaba.com/blog/us-literacy-statistics

▲

ecshafer 2 days ago | parent [-]

US school outcomes vary drastically. It really works out well in nice neighborhoods, and doesn't work out in some bad neighborhoods. Its down to cultural and familial expectations. Why does the same curriculum in say Scarsdale not have the same success in the Bronx? They are only like 15 miles apart in the same state.

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		The nice neighborhoods have parents that prioritize spending with their children, reading with them and helping them work through things they are struggling with and due to that they then score better on the standardized tests. The curriculum is just a net zero, and could be argued that it's a net negative because it wastes the kids time with useless knowledge that they will never need or use.

▲

s46dxc5r7tv8 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Please post the math then, instead of wild conjecture and speculation about cause and effect.

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's the thing. Nobody ever does the math on what these kind of programs cost society. The long term economic impacts that this will put on other families due to increased taxes, the businesses that might go under because they had to raise prices to cope with increased taxes, the business that never get created due to increased taxes, the other families that are now going to be struggling because they're a 1 income family and they now have to pay for everyone else's kids in addition to the care of their own children that they provide for and don't want to offloat to be taken care of by strangers, etc. etc.

▲

justinrubek 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh no, society will have to bear the cost of the infrastructure to maintain itself rather than reap the benefits of a population without putting back into. How terrible.

▲

KetoManx64 2 days ago | parent [-]

It doesn't work that way. The US Welfare programs have created multi generational families that have never worked and do not have any parents or grandparents that have ever worked a real job because if anyone did they would risk losing $100k's worth of free benefits to work a minimum wage job that would only pay them $30k. It has created a permanant underclass of people with no job skills that are wholly dependant on the system for their survival.

This is just an extension of that.

▲

lotsoweiners 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Would love to know where you’re getting this figure from. I worked in the welfare field before moving into tech (and my wife still does) and the payout for TANF plus SNAP for a single mother with like 5 kids would be closer to your $30k than the $100k. Of course that begs the question why work for it if you can get it for free but I believe TANF has a lifetime payout of like 5 years meaning that if the kids get it as a child they will not qualify for that TANF for themselves as an adult.

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Ok, now be genuine about the other benefits they're most likely receiving as well: - Medicaid - Section8 - WIC - LIHEAP - LIFELINE Just to name a few. I also worked for a non profit that helped people get government assistance and got an inside look at what these families are like and what they prioritize.

▲

doctorwho42 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you are using a whataboutism argument. In this case the childcare benefit will be universal, as in it is NOT means tested like your example.

▲

KetoManx64 2 days ago | parent [-]

It may not be means tested, but it will be utilized primarily by families on welfare, and lower income families and in the long term by middle class families who become lower income due to government subsidized programs like these forcing them to pay more for their daily necessities through an increased tax burden.

▲

ksenzee 2 days ago | parent [-]

You have clearly not shopped for childcare on the open market. Highly paid professionals still struggle to get childcare. Putting more resources into the system will be a net positive for all parents who need childcare.

	▲	KetoManx64 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		No it won't. Just like putting billions of dollars into the Public School System has not led to any real increase in test scores. And just like Universal healthcare has made healthcare plans just about unaffordable for anyone not working a corporate job and just like government student loans have made the price of college asinine and I could go on and on.