> Stay at home moms do not provide a less valuable service than childcare providers.

They are strictly less efficient than commercial daycare because the adult-child ratio is much higher. How many women would be of out of the work for if they were taking care of children?

Also, it prevents trickle down and the lifting of the poorest in society.

▲

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Less efficient? No they aren’t strictly less efficient because they provide MUCH better quality of care.

▲

Pet_Ant 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

To less children. Even if the area under the curve was the same (and I suspect that there very much are diminishing returns) they have a very negative effect on the Gini coefficient and that is a negative externality that should not be incentivised.

If your position is that people should not be compelled to contribute to overall society and the lifting of the boats of others, than there isn't enough alignment of values for a meaningful conversation.

	▲	tomrod 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		It does offer a potential backdoor to UBI while also encouraging desirable outcomes -- increased birth rate for wanted children, more people willing to foster, optionality for women to enter workforce, etc. I suspect there will be some fraud (I have 30 kids, wheee!) as well as foster/adoption abuse -- probably AZ's experiment with paying parents to home school would be instructive.

▲

tomrod 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

At the median: probably. At the tails: probably not.

▲

orthoxerox 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

However, they provide superior level of childcare.