The insanity continues.....pandering lefties

[Obvious Li]

Canada "can't afford not to" spend $5-billion a year on a new plan to create or maintain one million childcare spaces. The goal, said the NDP leader, is to make sure that parents don't pay more than $15 a day for a childcare space. It's an investment that pays for itself, he said, citing economists who claim that such programs contribute $1.75 for every dollar invested. "It's as good for the economy as it is for the family," he said.



As a gambit to win over the squeezed middle class, the pledge has tremendous electoral appeal. Average cost of daycare in Ontario is $1,152; in B.C., it's $1,047; and, in Nova Scotia it's $825. Which parent wouldn't want an extra $800 a month to spend on beer and popcorn?



But what Mr. Mulcair didn't say is it's the NDP that can't afford not to make child care a spending priority. It's a big ticket item but it has the potential to make Mr. Mulcair look like a hero in Quebec, where he needs to hold on to more than 50 seats.



The Quebec government has made it clear that it can no longer afford to subsidize the province's $7-a-day daycare – a program that costs $2.7-billion for 223,000 spaces. The options open to Philippe Couillard's government range from axing the program entirely to introducing a new pricing structure that could be adjusted to reflect parental income.



But that was before Captain Quebec burst onto the scene. Mr. Mulcair said the NDP plan will build on the Quebec model – the one that is now deemed unaffordable. "We will help Quebec keep this social asset," he said. The information sheet accompanying the press release makes it clear that the NDP plans to support the Quebec plan through direct transfers, "helping to maintain and strengthen the system".

[Obvious Li]

Angry Tom and the NDP would probably feel much more comfortable in a country like North Korea....where reality is fiction and the dear leader is god.....how else could you package horseshit like this and make it palatable to the general public...socialist govts. across canada fucked up day care in this country through over regulation until it is now almost non existent and what is available is unaffordable .....and now they want the taxpayers to join the cause and pony up 10-15 billion dollars annually...good luck with that Tommy....... ac_umm  ac_dance

[Anonymous]

Canada "can't afford not to" spend $5-billion a year on a new plan to create or maintain one million childcare spaces. The goal, said the NDP leader, is to make sure that parents don't pay more than $15 a day for a childcare space. It's an investment that pays for itself, he said, citing economists who claim that such programs contribute $1.75 for every dollar invested. "It's as good for the economy as it is for the family," he said.



As a gambit to win over the squeezed middle class, the pledge has tremendous electoral appeal. Average cost of daycare in Ontario is $1,152; in B.C., it's $1,047; and, in Nova Scotia it's $825. Which parent wouldn't want an extra $800 a month to spend on beer and popcorn?



But what Mr. Mulcair didn't say is it's the NDP that can't afford not to make child care a spending priority. It's a big ticket item but it has the potential to make Mr. Mulcair look like a hero in Quebec, where he needs to hold on to more than 50 seats.



The Quebec government has made it clear that it can no longer afford to subsidize the province's $7-a-day daycare – a program that costs $2.7-billion for 223,000 spaces. The options open to Philippe Couillard's government range from axing the program entirely to introducing a new pricing structure that could be adjusted to reflect parental income.



But that was before Captain Quebec burst onto the scene. Mr. Mulcair said the NDP plan will build on the Quebec model – the one that is now deemed unaffordable. "We will help Quebec keep this social asset," he said. The information sheet accompanying the press release makes it clear that the NDP plans to support the Quebec plan through direct transfers, "helping to maintain and strengthen the system".

I can understand how parents in Quebec would not want to lose that program.

[RW]

As a gambit to win over the squeezed middle class, the pledge has tremendous electoral appeal. Average cost of daycare in Ontario is $1,152; in B.C., it's $1,047; and, in Nova Scotia it's $825. Which parent wouldn't want an extra $800 a month to spend on beer and popcorn?

The shitty grammar of the author aside, is that what this asshat thinks parents do the money they save on daycare?  ac_rollseyes



I agree that $7/day is not sustainable, but $1000 per child is too steep.  There is a whole level of corporate sponsorship that could be tapped to run daycare programming should someone want to make the effort, rather than doing the sliding income scale shit.

[Obvious Li]

don't really care who they "tap" as long as it's not the taxpayers....unfortunately even the cons are throwing away more and more money at this boondoggle.......if you can't afford to look after your own kids.....stop having them.

It's bad enough we pay the indians to pump out rat after rat......that's enough.

[Obvious Li]

creeping statism.....i am no longer sure in which decade we decided to ask the state to provide for our every need...i don't recall hearing any politician in power saying they would ask the civil service to start sending cheques to everyone....well maybe Fidel Trudeau but that's about it.......creepy

[RW]

don't really care who they "tap" as long as it's not the taxpayers....unfortunately even the cons are throwing away more and more money at this boondoggle.......if you can't afford to look after your own kids.....stop having them.

It's bad enough we pay the indians to pump out rat after rat......that's enough.

Sorry but things ain't like the used to be with one parent working and one staying home.  To have both my kids in daycare, it was going to cost almost $2500 a month.  That's nuts.



It's time to get the best and the brightest to sit down and hash this one out.

[RW]

creeping statism.....i am no longer sure in which decade we decided to ask the state to provide for our every need...i don't recall hearing any politician in power saying they would ask the civil service to start sending cheques to everyone....well maybe Fidel Trudeau but that's about it.......creepy

Well how about Harper and his bullshit $100/kid under 6 for "child care flexibility"?  It didn't matter if you made $1 or $1 million dollars a year, you could apply for this child care grant whether you needed it or not.  That solved absolutely nothing and was a huge waste of money.

[Obvious Li]

creeping statism.....i am no longer sure in which decade we decided to ask the state to provide for our every need...i don't recall hearing any politician in power saying they would ask the civil service to start sending cheques to everyone....well maybe Fidel Trudeau but that's about it.......creepy

Well how about Harper and his bullshit $100/kid under 6 for "child care flexibility"?  It didn't matter if you made $1 or $1 million dollars a year, you could apply for this child care grant whether you needed it or not.  That solved absolutely nothing and was a huge waste of money.

don't disagree......it is a huge waste of money......what we need to revisit is why pre 1970 one worker made an income sufficient to provide a GOOD living for a family....maybe we should start there....i know the answer because i lived it...but you progressives live in a total fantasy world...completely divorced from reality.

[Anonymous]

Canada "can't afford not to" spend $5-billion a year on a new plan to create or maintain one million childcare spaces. The goal, said the NDP leader, is to make sure that parents don't pay more than $15 a day for a childcare space. It's an investment that pays for itself, he said, citing economists who claim that such programs contribute $1.75 for every dollar invested. "It's as good for the economy as it is for the family," he said.



As a gambit to win over the squeezed middle class, the pledge has tremendous electoral appeal. Average cost of daycare in Ontario is $1,152; in B.C., it's $1,047; and, in Nova Scotia it's $825. Which parent wouldn't want an extra $800 a month to spend on beer and popcorn?



But what Mr. Mulcair didn't say is it's the NDP that can't afford not to make child care a spending priority. It's a big ticket item but it has the potential to make Mr. Mulcair look like a hero in Quebec, where he needs to hold on to more than 50 seats.



The Quebec government has made it clear that it can no longer afford to subsidize the province's $7-a-day daycare – a program that costs $2.7-billion for 223,000 spaces. The options open to Philippe Couillard's government range from axing the program entirely to introducing a new pricing structure that could be adjusted to reflect parental income.



But that was before Captain Quebec burst onto the scene. Mr. Mulcair said the NDP plan will build on the Quebec model – the one that is now deemed unaffordable. "We will help Quebec keep this social asset," he said. The information sheet accompanying the press release makes it clear that the NDP plans to support the Quebec plan through direct transfers, "helping to maintain and strengthen the system".

Does anyone in Quebec really think this unaffordable program could continue. We Albertans are paying for it. If Quebec wants cheap daycare they can produce their own resources and pay for it themselves. ac_beating

[Obvious Li]

creeping statism.....i am no longer sure in which decade we decided to ask the state to provide for our every need...i don't recall hearing any politician in power saying they would ask the civil service to start sending cheques to everyone....well maybe Fidel Trudeau but that's about it.......creepy

Well how about Harper and his bullshit $100/kid under 6 for "child care flexibility"?  It didn't matter if you made $1 or $1 million dollars a year, you could apply for this child care grant whether you needed it or not.  That solved absolutely nothing and was a huge waste of money.

don't disagree......it is a huge waste of money......what we need to revisit is why pre 1970 one worker made an income sufficient to provide a GOOD living for a family....maybe we should start there....i know the answer because i lived it...but you progressives live in a total fantasy world...completely divorced from reality.

my apologies RW...in the interests of having a rational discussion i will stop saying shit like .....you progressives.....i should have said most people today live in a total fantasy world....that  includes people of all political persuasions......cheers

[Obvious Li]

Canada "can't afford not to" spend $5-billion a year on a new plan to create or maintain one million childcare spaces. The goal, said the NDP leader, is to make sure that parents don't pay more than $15 a day for a childcare space. It's an investment that pays for itself, he said, citing economists who claim that such programs contribute $1.75 for every dollar invested. "It's as good for the economy as it is for the family," he said.



As a gambit to win over the squeezed middle class, the pledge has tremendous electoral appeal. Average cost of daycare in Ontario is $1,152; in B.C., it's $1,047; and, in Nova Scotia it's $825. Which parent wouldn't want an extra $800 a month to spend on beer and popcorn?



But what Mr. Mulcair didn't say is it's the NDP that can't afford not to make child care a spending priority. It's a big ticket item but it has the potential to make Mr. Mulcair look like a hero in Quebec, where he needs to hold on to more than 50 seats.



The Quebec government has made it clear that it can no longer afford to subsidize the province's $7-a-day daycare – a program that costs $2.7-billion for 223,000 spaces. The options open to Philippe Couillard's government range from axing the program entirely to introducing a new pricing structure that could be adjusted to reflect parental income.



But that was before Captain Quebec burst onto the scene. Mr. Mulcair said the NDP plan will build on the Quebec model – the one that is now deemed unaffordable. "We will help Quebec keep this social asset," he said. The information sheet accompanying the press release makes it clear that the NDP plans to support the Quebec plan through direct transfers, "helping to maintain and strengthen the system".

Does anyone in Quebec really think this unaffordable program could continue. We Albertans are paying for it. If Quebec wants cheap daycare they can produce their own resources and pay for it themselves. ac_beating

sorry princess....quebecois come from a culture of complete entitlement...they actually believe the ROC owes them money....it kinda reminds you of the propaganda regime in North Korea......some of these dumb frenchmen have never been exposed to news from outside of quebec...so they believe whatever the separatists have told them.....sad ac_beating

[RW]

Okay Munday, let's jump off from the 70s and have you tell us what has changed to get us to this place.

[Obvious Li]

Okay Munday, let's jump off from the 70s and have you tell us what has changed to get us to this place?

well if i listed all the differences (negative) it would take pages....so i will try to keep it short and mention two or three differences.....



1. Taxes..when i first started working there were only two payroll deductions and they were so insignificant no one ever even talked about them...wages were low so after deductions average people never actually paid any income taxes (or very little)......they got to keep what they earned



2. Govt. regulations...govt has fully intruded into every facet of our lives.....if you make $80K annually and taxes account for 45%.....regulations, taxes (gst./pst.) and fees account for another 30-35%.....leaving 20% to cover food, shelter, clothing, transportation etc......if you were to factor in the extra cost of a house, vehicle, furnishings etc. resulting from stupid safety and code requirements it would take another huge chunk of the remainder......so you are beat before you start the year....there is no way to get ahead. The govt. has insured the average citizen will always fall short of reaching the elusive "middle class"..pre 1970 everyone could reach the middle class plateau with marginal effort.



3. Debt...pre 1970 debt was an anathema...nobody had credit cards and rarely mortgages and the banks were very particular who they loaned money to....it was absolutely common to see families with the parents in their 50's who had never owned a new car...simply out of the question unless you could pay cash..recreational toys were for the wealthy...new furniture was bought as you could afford it...if not then used would have to do..  



in other words the differences come in the form of more govt. more govt and more govt......and a different attitude.........people have become so lazy and complacent they accept the govt. stealing from them without complaint...in return they demand higher wages which does no good...50k, 80k 100k...what difference does it make when most of it if stolen from you......if one working parent got to keep 80% of what they earned then i posit one working parent in a family would be enough and the other could look after their kids and not have to spend most of the second wage on daycare.......



more later.......

[Anonymous]

Okay Munday, let's jump off from the 70s and have you tell us what has changed to get us to this place?

well if i listed all the differences (negative) it would take pages....so i will try to keep it short and mention two or three differences.....



1. Taxes..when i first started working there were only two payroll deductions and they were so insignificant no one ever even talked about them...wages were low so after deductions average people never actually paid any income taxes (or very little)......they got to keep what they earned



2. Govt. regulations...govt has fully intruded into every facet of our lives.....if you make $80K annually and taxes account for 45%.....regulations, taxes (gst./pst.) and fees account for another 30-35%.....leaving 20% to cover food, shelter, clothing, transportation etc......if you were to factor in the extra cost of a house, vehicle, furnishings etc. resulting from stupid safety and code requirements it would take another huge chunk of the remainder......so you are beat before you start the year....there is no way to get ahead. The govt. has insured the average citizen will always fall short of reaching the elusive "middle class"..pre 1970 everyone could reach the middle class plateau with marginal effort.



3. Debt...pre 1970 debt was an anathema...nobody had credit cards and rarely mortgages and the banks were very particular who they loaned money to....it was absolutely common to see families with the parents in their 50's who had never owned a new car...simply out of the question unless you could pay cash..recreational toys were for the wealthy...new furniture was bought as you could afford it...if not then used would have to do..  



in other words the differences come in the form of more govt. more govt and more govt......and a different attitude.........people have become so lazy and complacent they accept the govt. stealing from them without complaint...in return they demand higher wages which does no good...50k, 80k 100k...what difference does it make when most of it if stolen from you......if one working parent got to keep 80% of what they earned then i posit one working parent in a family would be enough and the other could look after their kids and not have to spend most of the second wage on daycare.......



more later.......

This is something both my husband and I see all the time..



When we first came to Canada as a family, we saved for everything..



Both of my parents had labour type jobs, but we stayed out of debt..



On the other hand, I know people that have good paying jobs that will not live within their means..



New cars, furniture and consumer electronics when they don't need it..



Trips to Caribbean destinations paid for with credit cards..



No savings and no RRSP's, just debt and spend..



In the end, this will only lower their living standards..



Overspending is as bad as drink or gambling.