So, what, pay someone a full time salary for caring for 1 or two children? Pretty sure that doesn't scale

If governments aren’t willing to value women at what their work at home is worth, they’re not serious about tackling the birthrate problem. Show me a country with universal childcare with a TFR above 2.1. It’s a cheap substitute for the love and attention only a mother can provide young children

▲

russdill an hour ago | parent [-]

Outside the home childcare is not 24/7. It's for a portion of the day. Also, it's really weird to be making this argument for mothers and not fathers.

Having childcare available gives the opportunity for both parents to spend more quality time with their children.

▲

sib301 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The fact he only supports women staying at home should tell you everything you need to know about the caliber person you’re dealing with.

▲

frumplestlatz 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> Outside the home childcare is not 24/7.

No, but it is during our most productive, aware, and valuable daylight hours.

> Also, it's really weird to be making this argument for mothers and not fathers.

In the context of human history, it’s not weird at all.

> Having childcare available gives the opportunity for both parents to spend more quality time with their children.

How?

It reduces the time children spend with a parent, and it creates a world in which both parents have to work just to afford having children.

	▲	russdill 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I suppose in the context of human history, you might argue to enslave a population based on racial characteristics in order to provide childcare. For many families, both parents have to work. Most time spent not working or sleeping is spent doing a task simultaneously with childcare. Cleaning, preparing meals, repairing things, laundry, etc. Even for families where one individual shoulders the bulk of the burden this is largely the case.