What universal childcare could do for US
I am dead-set against unnecessary government spending. If tax revenue is going to be used for any purpose, as a taxpayer I want to see exactly what social/financial gains are made of our investment.
As I look at the numbers, universal childcare is exactly the type of investment I want to be making with my tax dollars. First let me explain as best as I understand what universal childcare means. This is when the government uses funds to create more, regulated childcare spaces which are covered to the point that parents have a considerably lower daily fee. Often the paid portion is altered according to the family's income but it remains significantly more affordable (Denmark pays 3% of their income to childcare whereas in Canada families often are paying up to 30%). More spaces. More quality control. Less expense to working parents.
Let's be clear on
1) More play. And I mean the unstructured, child-centered play that benefits their development so significantly. Kids aren't playing at home as much as they used to. A child's roaming radius has shrunk by 90% in the last 40 years. That means that their world is considerably smaller and in these smaller worlds their ability to play is limited. With more children in daycare you get more children under the tutelage of trained early childhood educators and they will be involved in more developmentally appropriate play than what most children get at home, all while spending the majority of their days off screens. This should improve long term well-being and achievement.
2) More people working. Many parents decide that after all is said and done with the astronomical childcare costs in Canada, it just isn't worth going back to work. Straight dollars and cents, when it comes to tax revenue, says that more people working means more revenue. There will also be an increase in job opportunities in the early childhood field which is predominantly staffed by women so on either side this will be a step forward in helping women become more financially independent which benefits society as a whole. And I already hear you saying, "yes but more women at home, taking care of their children is what we need as a society". You're right, children should be parented by parents and if Mom stays home and keeps developing that bond with child this is a good thing for everyone but let me be clear, Mom staying home is the epitome of financial independence! and the unfortunate reality is that most families in Canada do not have that independence. Lower childcare costs and increased job opportunities gives more families this privilege. Not to mention the large portion of single mothers who find it extremely difficult and expensive to go back to school or work because of child care costs. This gets them back in school, back to work so that they can earn independence through work rather than relying on the welfare system which at best keeps them barely floating.
3) More tax revenue. As I mentioned above, when you have a significant portion of your population go back to work there is a windfall for both provincial and federal governments (which is why I think both governments should chip in to pay for it). It pays for itself! How many government programs pay for themselves? It makes financial sense because our governments will actually bring in more money than it spends on this initiative. One could then argue that this is actually the most effective and least expensive way to give financial assistance to lower income families. That has to be inviting to fiscal conservatives.
4) More villages. I'm trying to stick with the 'more' theme here. When I say more villages I mean villages in the sense of "it takes a village". My ideal child rearing situation includes the following: first, spending as much quality time with my children as I can. Second, having my children spend regular quality time with extended family. Third, I want my children playing in an unstructured but safe environment with other children. And finally, I want as many trusted community members involved in my children's development. I consider my wife and myself to be excellent parents. I am so confident in our abilities and our dedication to our children. But we still need loads of help! We have benefited innumerably from the support of extended family AND community members through neighbours, church friends, and community programs like the Family Centre or Public Library for example. We need the village to help raise our children so we have opted to put our 3 year old in preschool two days a week to introduce her to more peers and more trusted adults who are motivated both internally and financially to increase her well-being. This is great. We can afford this but many parents can't. A universal program helps parents invite their child into the warm arms of the village for a period of time.
5) More.... better options. Bad englishing, I know. Our current childcare reality is that the grand majority of spaces available are private which inherently is not 'bad' but it does mean that this is caring for children for a profit. My Mother-in-law has run a dayhome for decades and provides great service all while earning a comfortable living for her own family. What happens with the open market of daycare however is that it motivates parents to look for the least expensive options or the some cases the only available options which may not always have the best quality. By creating affordable daycare spaces that are also regulated to ensure quality programming and safety it gives families of all income levels equal opportunity to good childcare. As a proponent of education reform let me say that nobody gets it more right than early childhood educators. They are trained in concepts like emergent curriculum, child-centered programming, and play-based learning. Regulation says they HAVE to have multi-sensory play and multicultural resources. Licensed and regulated daycares are good, not perfect, but good and this policy can help more children be placed in such a setting rather than staying in the neighbour's crowded apartment because she charges the least.
6) More babies. Some may worry about the world being over-populated but we live in CANADA folks. We are one of the most underpopulated countries in the world. We need more Canadians. We need to grow. A growing population means a growing economy. Contrary to what some might say, the grand majority of people produce more than they consume. New babies mean new spending and growth. We struggle with a skilled labour shortage now and it is projected to get worse. We don't have enough people that can do what we need done. Canada has relied and will continue to rely on immigration to fill those gaps but more home-grown bodies could certainly help as well. And you might ask, "Do we really want people these days to be having more children? Won't that just add to the never-ending cycle of poverty?" Well first, this policy helps lower income families, particularly mothers, get back to work and have a better chance of ending their poverty cycle themselves but second, it also has shown in Quebec and Sweden among other countries to increase the birth rate across income levels. This means more educated, wealthy people are going to have children as well. More Canadians is good for Canada. This policy will do that.
Comments
Post a Comment