Here's an idea - look up the definition of 'ill-informed'.

You know, 20 some years ago I needed help with daycare so I could work and I got it. Now, because both of my sons that needed daycare back then are soldiers, I guess I could say to you to fight for your own ^%$# oil.

What goes around, comes around. We're all in this together and the one you're bitching about costing you too much money today may very well be the dr that one day saves you or your kid's life, or the scientist that figures out how to make solar energy as easy to use as gas, or even the lowly farm help that picked the strawberries you'll be having for dinner tonight so you don't have to because obviously, you feel you're better than them.

In an ideal world, everyone would be able to afford childcare. But if you know anything about how our economy functions, that is impossible.

Just what we need, more family's on food stamps. No doubt this is where this takes us.

Can anyone really take Mitt Romney seriously, after all he did say he is not worried about the poor.

What surprised me about this article is that the lady felt that she had risen out of poverty and yet she was not paying the $1000 a month for the care of her child, she was depending on support. If an individual is counting on State or Federal support they are most certainly not independent or at an above poverty level position. People actually become dependent when they can pay for their own costs and the costs of the children they create. So for her to believe she had achieved any status above poverty is just a terrible misconception.

Now the other issue....day care that costs $1000 a month. Why do we suppose that a daycare is reasonable in charging $1000 a month per child...well because they know that the Federal and State Government will subside the cost up to that point. Perhaps, this mother should have talked to her child care provider and renegotiated a lower cost...after all shouldn't the daycare provider be interested in providing their service to see all the Dr. and Physicists that itgranny believes are just buds waiting to bloom. Perhaps when the subsidy is not available these daycare centers will need to regroup and start charging what the market requires instead of what they can demand and gouge the Federal and State governments.

The other issue is the same ol same ol...those folks who will cheat the sytem and use the funds to line their own pockets by setting up a "child care" center and raking in all they can to split the proceeds with whom ever the family member is that they are supposed to be watching.

As usual it is the thieves and criminals who have no scruples about abusing a system and placing out those who are truly in need.

TXMOM or to turn it around, why do businesses believe they can pay so low that their employees need gov. assistance in order to survive?

shamrock, neutering is cheaper, easier and just as effective.

itgranny...first if you read the story this woman worked for a non-profit, not a traditional company. Companies typically pay based on an individuals education and skill set. The fact that in America we have a tremendous problem with people who drop-out of school before they have remedial knowledge or skills of value highlight the systemic problems we have in the United States. Now these folks are certainly capable of basic labor jobs so why are so many on relief of some sort and unemployed? Why are families or women having children when they cannot afford to provide: food, shelter, clothing and daycare. These are very basic needs, much more important than iphones, big flat screen TV's and eating out at McDonalds thee or four times a week. It is about priorities and as Mitt Romney said...dignity. That dignity is goes beyond having a job that pays a middle class wage because if people drop out of the free and fair public school education that is provided as part of a community trust then why should we as the community continue to support their insatiable appetites for handouts?

As for big bad companies...they aren't all that bad... if I had continued to work after I gave birth to my daughter I could have placed her in the company on site day care for a fraction of what outside daycare would have cost. Not all companies are bad. When my daughter did attend ECI at age 2 1/2 we put her in our Church ECI program...it was a reach to afford on one income but she was social and needed the interaction. because it was a reach I checked with the IRS to see if we could write off the cost of her tuition and the answer was no. The IRS did not care if my daughter had a well rounded toddler and ECI education. When my daughter turned four I checked at our local elementary about her enrolling in the ECI for age 4 (by then we had three kids) we were told that would not be possible because that program was reserved for kids with a need for ESL, or were in single parent households or who had two parents working outside of the home. Where that was an irritant, that my child was not welcome at the public school until the had to take her, we continued to ekk out the funds to keep our kids in the Private Church school as long as they were able to go. So for people to say "I can't afford to work or I can't afford daycare" that is a bunch of crap. It means that in many households in this country parents have no problem taking all they can from the Federal and State Government as long as it suites their purpose.

Now what are your thoughts on a daycare charging $1000 a month for one child? Isn't that a bit excessive and do you suppose that if the Federal and State Government only subsidized up to $700 a month that would be the cost for her child and all others who are in the dole? In our area the best private schools K-12 charge between $750 and $1200 a month depending on grade and which school is chosen and if sibling discounts apply. What would make a infant through age 5 program worth that much money?

Agree, Itgranny. Or one carrier battle group. We have nearly a dozen. Most countries have none. The rest have one or two. There is military superiority and then there is absurdity.

@ Roger.. Exactly. Willard "My Dog ASKED to ride on the roof" Romney and the GOP as a whole have an outright war on families (if they don't have the exact ratio of people in the family the religious want,) (im) morality, an attack on personal liberties, such as rights for certain groups of people, from women to gays to minorities.

The Willlster is seeking to invade Iran. No wonder they want to cut education spending, health care spending, spending on the essentials. Educating people allows them to make informed decisions for themselves. Stripping that choice away makes for a population that is easily molded to your way of acting, thinking and being. This is typical of the religious doctrines around the world, since man created religions.

The GOP have 1 goal in mind. Total control of America and the world through force and religion. The GOP can't stand people who don't act like them, react like them, attend a church they want you to attend, etc. The GOP are about to end America as we know it.

Cutting daycare and essential services for ALL Americans, just only proves to the people of America, that the GOP do not have anyone's best interests at heart, except their own wallets. The GOP have told families, you are on your own, we need the money for war and our pet projects.

Wise up America, the GOP or Gods Only People party are destroying this nation..

So you'd like to get rid of the farm bill and make it so all of our food comes from out of the country too. Eventually we will be making nothing and growing nothing in our own country.

txmom32:

$1,000 per month is not a lot in the Boston area. I know people who pay more. Also, $1,200 a year for a private school. Not in the Boston area. I pay in excess of $10,000 for my son's high school. Once again, the cost of everything depends on where you live.

I don't know what it is inTexas, but if you're in Minnesota, if you care for a newborn, you can only have 2 other children under 5 without a helper. That's $36000 a year for 3 kids. Out of that money comes fixing up the house to code, toys, child furniture, food to feed the kids and insurance. While looking at it from the parents point of view, this is a lot of money, I can't say that's excessive income when you look at it as employment.

Tracy, that farm bill isn't going to make or break farmers. I live in a rural area and heard a farmer say that the $40,000 he got from the farm bill was "just mad money for the wife"

txmom, wages are NOT keeping up with the cost of living and there are people working full time who can barely keep their family fed. I'm not surprised you don't understand what millions of Americans have to go through while you pass harsh judgement on those who struggle. I'll say it again, wages of 95% of us have been almost flat for decades, while the cost for everything has gone up. I know a single mom who live in a room (son sleeps in the closet) while she starts over after a divorce from a man who took it all and left. She works full time and barely makes it (no tv, cable, etc, she lives at a bare minimum. Her son is in elementary school and he has to walk home and wait for her to get off work.

http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2010/09/16/new-2009-census-data-income-down-for-the-poor-down-for-the-middle-class-up-for-the-rich-in-the-usa/

Only in America would Jamie Dimon make $23 million a year while parents can't afford daycare.

txmom32 - if I had continued to work after I gave birth to my daughter I could have placed her in the company on site day care for a fraction of what outside daycare would have cost.

Very, very few American moms have that choice,Txmom. Yet you seem to have no problem disparaging those who don't because you did.

Typical "I got mine, tough for you" GOP attitude.

And I'd be interested to hear what you do for a living these days. Since you seem to have an awful lot of free time to criticize the needs of others on these boards.

mrsl...I apologize I mis typed....those figures were per month. The privates in our area range from $9,000 up to $16,000 a year for the International School. Still sort of a bargain if you can afford it.

When we lived outside of London the school cost around $40K per kid. Now that was absolutely fabulous school but then that is what becomes of costs when the government subsides from cradle to grave and there is a wilting middle class. Now that cost didn't even consider the 40% vat we had to pay to HMR on tuition.

I'm thinking that our middle class would absolute wilt into a have and have not society if our Country decided to take a socialistic approach...where the rich had to make enough money to keep themselves above the frey because if you pay them off it doesn't make sense to have your kids sit next to them in school or at the day care.

The more our Government subsidize to any preferred group be they business like Farming or Energy or Medical or Child Care the higher the cost will be for everyone. It takes the whole principle of supply and demand out of the equation and makes the subsidy the bench mark.

Just another example of GREED overwhelming logic. Another example of how people that use the name CONSERVATIVE do not even know the MEANING of the WORD. It would be CONSERVATIVE to spend a little to make more. To spend enough that people could WORK and make more. But NO. The IDIOTS that call themselves CONSERVATIVES but are really REACTIONARY OLIGARCHS would rather get a dollar today than two dollars tomorrow.

YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE. YOU ARE IDIOTS.

txmom... while I agree to some degree about the subsidizing, to get it straightened around, who's going to blink first. the employee's who let their kid's starve if they don't get help, or the employer's who see their bottom line shrink if they have to pay more and then say they'll just get the chinese to build their stuff. The gov. should be there to level the playing field and make rules that are fair for all.

Right now they've decided subsidies are the best way to accomplish that. Personally, I would prefer taxing/tarriffing the dickens out of imports so our own people would do the work.

spot on SRS,

turns out conservatives aren't conservative at all, but they are anti society !!!

every man for himself !!!!!

btw; many of these people needing help with daycare costs are single moms. The deadbeat dad is missing in action and as everyone now knows, females are paid less, you cannot support a family in this country on only one income unless you work on Wall street..........

mrsl...I understand your point. However, if childcare is a business, not a way to stay at home and care for your own children then it would be necessary to make the commitment to be a real business and make a living while employing others. It is the grand design of things....apparently the median income in Minnesota is around $51,000 a year....it wouldn't take much to hire staff and house enough kids to make that median income a reality for all.

Lib 50...

wages are NOT keeping up with the cost of living and there are people working full time who can barely keep their family fed.

Again, that goes back to skill set although, I concede the employment issues that have plagued our country through the past three years have sustained painfully hight losses for employable people. Unfortunately, the housing bubble created false inflation and the unchecked debt for individuals to spend beyond their means certainly caused a false sense of inflation putting people at risk for failure. To decide about families with two people working who can barely keep their families fed....that goes back to skill set. If individuals are not trained to do a job that is in demand then they will probably be relegated to some unskilled job that was never intended to pay at a scale to support a family...fast food cashier, food delivery person, some store clerk positions...these were all jobs that used to be reserved for part time student workers. Now they are jobs that are supposed to offer a fair wage and benefits. It creates a false inflation because people are not preparing themselves for a middle class or more in their choice of vocation. We have lost apprentice ships in trades which pretty much eliminates a viable group of middle class job seekers. We have allowed foreign labor to work our lower wage jobs so that there are fewer avenues for unskilled US labor. What we need to do as a nation is encourage training of some sort. We have many of those programs in our State and it makes a difference for families. I have seen many families who made it a priority to seek training for skilled jobs and they have benefited greatly and with dignity from State programs that support this need while raising children. They know for short term pain they will have long term gain. Many seek the support of their families to help them through this time....there is no shame in that, what else is family for if not for support in the time of need? Unfortunately, many of these families are trained in the medical industry and will feel the pain of Obama care so their climb to middle class will take longer if not just out of reach because they will not be making the money they do under a private health system.

I know a single mom who live in a room (son sleeps in the closet) while she starts over after a divorce from a man who took it all and left.

I think we all know people like this and it is horrible and any father or mother that will walk away from their kids is a sorry bastard or bitch for making their children suffer and well they should be held accountable by the law and be required to step up and finance the cost of their children. Not for nothing but this is how my darling dear one grew up...his mother was under educated and his father left her to raise four kids and never sent a cent. She has had a very hard life, but she chose it because she chose the man who didn't have the character to stick it our or to support his own kids. My husband grew up not being able to join in sports because she couldn't afford to take him to the Dr "if" he got hurt. There were many nights he went to bed without supper because they didn't have money for food. When his bicycle got stolen he was just out a bicycle because there was no money to replace a gift that he received. This is why we subsidize her life in retirement. She couldn't possibly support a dignified life on SS and she never had the ability, due to lack of formal education, (although she is a very bright woman in general) to have a job that paid enough where she could set money aside. So as family three of her four Children provide a pension for her. We pay for supplemental insurance, my brother in law and sister in law both take her on vacations. We give as much as we can based on gifting laws because it would really suck for her to have to pay taxes on what she receives from her kids.

Real Anerican first...

Very, very few American moms have that choice,Txmom. Yet you seem to have no problem disparaging those who don't because you did.

I think you read something into my remarks that wasn't there. I have no problem with parents who work. Families are made up of many different dynamics. It is for individual families to decide what is best for them and their children. My darling and I made a choice....My darling daughter was born in 1996. My husband and I together made over $100,000 a year before taxes. When I was pregnant we made the decision to cut our combined income in half. We prepared for this by selling his home and my home and bought our home based on his income alone. Are you saying that women who choose to stay home are some how less than those who continue to work? Because, I can tell you I know a lot of women who and jobs ranging from hair dress to Attorney and many of us who were in between who walked away from good jobs to stay at home. So for you to denigrate those of us who made accommodation to "have that choice" is just insulting.

And I'd be interested to hear what you do for a living these days. Since you seem to have an awful lot of free time to criticize the needs of others on these boards.

Well let's see...I raise my kids and care for my husband. I have uprooted my life several times so my husband could pursue his career. I spent a whole lot of nights alone raising our family in a foreign country because his job demanded he travel. fair enough as we parent together and understand sometimes the level of input is determined by outside forces. I've spent a whole lot of days volunteering at their schools in literacy programs and general PTA or school volunteer programs along with outside volunteer opportunities so that my kids understand the value of helping others. I was room mom twice, but not for my own kids rather for the ESL classes, in the Houston Elementary they attended because the mom's from the ESL classes couldn't bother to get out of their cars in the car pool lane and walk in and help the teacher or to make sure their kids had the same parties the other classes were having. When we were out of the country I volunteered for every opportunity that came along because I came from a culture where volunteering is an important part of parenting. Not every culture holds this important. When we moved back to the States we were in a comfortable one income place, and I will not disparage or take lightly the successes my darling dear one has built for himself. I still volunteered as I can and still chair events and found that parents working and non were very happy to offer up their time. Basically, if I chaired a committee they would pledge whatever resources time or money that I needed. Field trips were not just left to those of us who stayed at home with 8 to 5 available but by parents who took off time from work to be there and support their kids. I have a great respect for those folks who put their children first so if you have misread that fact well you are simply wrong.

Unfortunately, due to illness I have not been as available this past year with school but I have maintained my personal support of Little league and my Daughters AFJROTC parent support. Sadly, my kids have felt jaded for this fact. As I am getting stronger again I have some ground to make up for a rough year plus. And I can say in that time, regardless of my health my kids received what they needed but not as much of what they just wanted.

txmom -- just by what you discuss on here it is obvious you are NOT middle class with your family living on an average income of 30,000 to 50,000. And what heck does a $40,000 private school in the UK have to do with daycare in the US? Sounds like you are just bragging about what the rest of us don't have. I was paying $600 per month for a LATCHKEY program for my youngest two. Summer sitter was right at $1,000 per month. The YWCA ran the latchkey program. They don't "negotiate" on the price. My daycare is not subsidized because my salary is too high. Still, I don't begrudge the woman in the article for being self sufficient except for the daycare assistance. Getting started and keeping the ball rolling is what many poor people need. She was headed in the right direction and ought to feel good about it. Spending money on daycare while they work makes a lot more sense than giving out free rent and food stamps to do nothing. That's a road that leads to nowhere, designed and built by old white men in Washington DC.

What happened to family panning? Why are people having kids they can't afford to properly take care of without some kind of public assistance?

SRS...you seem to be a very angry person...so what is really the definition of Greed...the person who took full advantage of the public trust and completed their free and fair education or the one who dropped out because they chose too? What is the definition of Greed....the person who maintains a skill set and chooses to keep growing in their vocation and saving for their future or the one who won't bother to keep up to date with their vocation or who chooses to live on credit until the bottom falls out and that is ok because the Government will step in and pay their way? So you obviously feel some sort of animosity for those who have managed to weather the extended recession do you feel any animosity for those who have gamed the unemployment benefit by working off book and taking the extended benefit while depleting the coffers for those who are truly in a bad place?

itgranny...don't know about your state but in Texas our state through the school system and with Federal dollars does a great deal to assure that children in need have free or reduced breakfast, lunch (and afternoon snack if they are enrolled in after school day care.) They have tried to do as much for the SCHIP program but that is something that requires parent participation...if the parent does not complete the form and apply there is no coverage. To be quite clear that is a shortcoming of the parent not the community. But then these programs, like may others are very abused by those who lie to get free or reduced priced stuff. Again that is on the parents not the community.

As for jobs being shipped to China, Mexico, Viet Nam, etc...this is much more complex than shutting down US operations to pay less for manufacturing. The cost of doing business in the United States is very expensive. Unions and States that create more cost via taxes or extraordinary benefits for manufacturing companies branch out because they can't charge the cost for good because demand will weaken based on a price point. Another factor is very simply that some US businesses are manufacturing where their market is strong. Personally, I would love to see more products made in the United States. When at all possible I will choose American first...if it is available and if I can truly afford the American made. I still believe our craftsmanship in certain durable goods will outlast any third world country product. Unfortunately, it is so much easier to assure that my pets have US made to eat and play with than I can assure for my kids to eat, dress in and play with. Unfortunately the Federal Government through their tariff and treaty programs have done no great favors for American made products both here and abroad....when we lived in England in stead of buying the typical B-day cake for the twins...they got to share a package of Oreos that cost USD $21. We couldn't even afford to purchase US beef, not even when they had the whole mad cow scare going on around us so we just bought Scottish beef. Why wouldn't we embrace reasonable trade programs with our closest allies in place of trusting goods from China? Fix the trade programs and we can start repatriating jobs. States do themselves no favors by assessing excessive taxes to manufacturers because the are seen as cash cows....and yet the cows go to greener pastures. The Federal Government makes the same errors...they subsidize some and over tax others...they give some industries a pass while heaping pain on small business owners. Unions who once served a purpose are now just intrusive with demands...it is time that we allow the Department of Labor work for all Americans. The Government needs to stop the favoritism to Unions in Government contracts and encourage employment for all Americans. As far as we have sunk we can still right the ship with common sense.

Family panning: all members of one family standing on the street corner "panning" for money? Isn't that "public" assistance?

Granny...So are you saying because I live in a household where we have an above average income that I should just shut up and keep paying those taxes? The point of the England school compairison was to juxtoppose the US free economy and the UK socialist system. To put it bluntly...in a socialist system the middle class pretty much dissappears because the top economic earners subsize everyone else. There are no incentives for excellence in work product be it working as a teller in a bank or watching kids. Every time "stuff happens" it is blamed on not enough money...eg. "why did the child in your care walk into the river and drown"..."because the rich can still afford to be rich and I don't make enough to watch the child every minute". The mantra of it all comes down to money and not work product has created a system destined to fail in many places abroad...see Greece...see Cuba...see Venezuela... for evidence of a bleeding society. Watch other EU countries follow Greece into the grave because the bottom line is money for the masses not a sustainable society.

As someone pointed out, daycare is a business. What do you consider "affordable". Your child is there for 8-10 hours a day. Do you really think it should only cost you $100 a week. A lot of daycare centers have teachers that are certified, they're not just babysitters. People need to do their due diligence before they have children and find out just what the daycare costs are. My husband and I pay for our own children's' education, we can't afford to subsidize a whole group's daycare.

What she pays is not that much we pay 900 for two but that is not that bad.

When we lived outside of London the school cost around $40K per kid.

When we lived outside London, my kids went to a great school for FREE. You probably had your kids in the American School, but mine were in a great local school where my son was reading before he was 5yrs old.

Seems to me like she's been relatively responsible in her family planning as she only has one child and was working a full time job trying to support him. I have absolutely NO problem with my tax money going to help someone like her, it's the people who aren't even trying because they have no drive or motivation to do anything that I resent paying for every day that I am at work away from my family so that I can help them sit at home doing nothing but chain smoking and watching HDTV.

Child care cost hikes derailing women's careers

BS, I say. They did that to themselves, in most cases, by having kids they should not have had. Stop whining and spinning BS.

Lib 50...yes my kids went to the "International School" because they offered an American curriculum, also because the "International School" was prepared to support the needs of my three dyslexics. Now for them to receive support in an UK school they would have had to go through their system to be identified...at the time there was a 9mos to a year back log for that process. They would have also lost credit when we transferred back to Texas for school...then there was that whole restrictive environment of wearing a uniform...As my kids are basically middle class American kids there are no exclusions for them to re-entering into the American System as there are for many foreign born or educated students...they would have lost credit and would have needed to fulfill some requirements in either summer school or they would had been held back a year. Not a reasonable option to me or my children.

I can certainly appreciate that you have no regrets and treasured your experience over there....I did as well and would not trade the experience or connections to friends for the world. I would imagine you feel the same.

The one thing I do have to point out is the schools over there are no more free than ours are here...you certainly paid Council Taxes and your 40% to HMR. That is sort of like saying the NHS is free...but not really because of the high taxes for those who work.

The fact that you have a lot of money doesn't make you dirt. But you should be able to admit, if only to yourself, that it wasn't just your own efforts but the work and efforts of others that helped. When we help others become productive we help grow the economy just as we do when we invest for the future. When we subsidize the farmer we assure a food supply at relatively low prices. We all have a stake in each other; it has never been " me or them" only "us". Balanced budgets and deficit reduction loose their luster when accompanied by stagnation. So be careful what you cut. It could be our throates.

For FREE? Yeah right,fell right out of the sky didn't it.

txmom, my son had a speech problem and got free speech therapy while we were there and also went to free preschool when he was 3. When we moved back they went right back into public school (and missed the uniforms), although since my son was a year ahead (they start a year earlier there) he ended up with a wasted year when we got back. We used the NHS (wonderful care, I walked there in 5 minutes from home). Their system WORKS. Our experience overseas was great, taxes and all. Worth every pence (and more).

rufusthedog....I freely admit that it is a generous society that helps with the needs of the least among them. The United States, the State of Texas (along with other states) my own community (along with thousands of other communities like mine) all offer safety nets that make us a better people. Unfortunately, we do a piss poor job of taking care of the least of us as we have not met the needs of the mentally challenged, elderly, and others who fall through the cracks in this country in lieu of allowing cheats and thieves to go un-checked as some savvy criminals steal the support necessary for many in our society to live a dignified standard of living. For every 10 real person who are in need of a safe and healthy place to live or medical care, food etc. (elderly, mentally handicapped or battered spouse instance) there are 5 people who will drawing from those coffers fraudulently. We have to stop the fraud by providers and consumers so that those truly in need can have their needs met.

Unfortunately, your example of farm aid...I don't know that that does assure us relatively low cost food...any more than subsidizing energy affords us low cost energy. What we need to do, as long as we are feeling economic pain right now, is deal with a reset.....let prices go back to basic capitolits economic principles and deal with supply and demand. Outlay will reset and incomes will reset and we can get back to a real economy instead of propping up a contrived economy. While we are at it let's get rid of petro dollars and go back on the gold standard.

lib50 my kids went through speech therapy in the states well before we went. I have to say that I was pleased with what they received here as well. I do think it saved them a lot of problem later on...it also masked the dyslexia a bit. As for the NHS....I think we have had that discussion before...we kept our kids on their private care system...to me they are a bit decadent but then it is a polite society. My husband and I used the NHS...yes a five minute down the hill when we needed to get there. Unfortunately, they didn't find the cancer growing on my husbands thyroid, we had to come home where a Dr. would actually palpitate his throat...and they diagnosed me as depressed instead of doing an MRI to find the disk pressing on a never. Funny thing when we returned and I got back home to my DR the depression disappeared when the treatment worked and the pain went away. Funny how that works.

I wouldn't give up living in England for anything and would galdly pay the taxes and go back for a few more years.

Sorry about you and your husband's misdiagnosis, but that also happens here. I guess nothing is perfect (but one IS much cheaper). Sounds like we both got a lot out of our expat years.

(and I do remember a previous chat)

So, let me get this straight, you would rather that these people have no child care and stay at home on public assistance until their chidlren are old enough to go to school? Pennywise and pound foolish. Of course, you would rather that they all just die and go away and stop bothering to pollute your beautiful little world and mind.

^this

@nothingnew: Affordable childcare is an urgent and vital need across the country. It's criminal that neither party has taken this issue under serious consideration and action. It's NOT like sitting back in front of tv, collecting SSI and other "free money." Thank God it is on Romney's radar.

oh that's right lets take away birth control and child care and then cut social services and food stamps, in a time that inflation is out of control compared to wages not increasing to reflect that inflation in years, but lets subsidize the rich, wow i know the trickle effect is working now!

Politicians don't care because the people who have trouble paying for childcare aren't political donors.

Tax the rich? I pay a higher percentage of my income then the "Rich" do. Please?

My daughters daycare costs $12,740 a year. The least expensive I found in Austin was about $7,800 for a baby warehouse...not where I wanted my DD to spend her days. Of the quality daycare with good reputations the minimum was $9000 a year. Daycare & preschool is not exactly the place you want to cut corners. Even after school care is really expensive.

Now my husband and I are just fine and can afford this but I do know that there is no way a poverty stricken single mom or dad (or even couples that work at low paying jobs) could afford quality daycare for their child. So they get stuck in a system that just doesn't do anything but keep them dependent on the system.

So you can sit back in your pristine ivory tower and judgmentally say, "if you can't afford kids don't have them." But that my dear will cost MORE of your tax dollars b/c the kids are there and will continue to be. It will cost you more if we don't help with daycare costs. Same reason I support subsidizing birth control... it makes more sense to me to use some tax dollars to help a woman not get pregnant than to pay for welfare or foster care expenses for that kid after it's born.

I live in the messy real world must be a pristine little place you live in.

My daughters daycare costs $12,740 a year

This translates to roughly $16,000 worth of gross salary, plus mileage dropping your daughter off. The higher cost would be that your daughter is being raised by non-parents during core hours of the day, during her most formative years.

How difficult would it be to work less, spend less, and both parents don't work the same hours?

I am in an expensive state - Mass. The wife and I are both 30 hours a week, and do not work the same hours. We have two children, 9 and 6. Neither has seen the inside of a day care center, nor been with a relative or in-home nanny.

We don't need to make an extra $16,000 a year because we don't use daycare, and that allows us to cut our hours, or at the very very least, work different shifts.

If my kids grow up to send their kids to some government-run day orphanage, I would be aghast. They didn't learn that garbage from me.

What ever happened to the good old days of the neighborhood teenager babysitting to earn some money during the summer? The neighborhood stay at home mom watching some kids? When did this "you have to send your child to a licensed daycare" crap start? That's why people can't afford daycare anymore.

Hey. No problem.

We just TAKE BACK every nickle a rich guy has when he dies. You know, the WHINING LITTLE RICH KID TAX. NO ESTATES. NO WEALTHY FAMILIES RULING OUR ECONOMY FOREVER. I am sick an tired of WHINING LITTLE RICH KIDS like that evil jerk MITT ROMNEY. Really. If that guy DIDN'T GET MILLIONS FROM HIS FATHER he would be living under a bridge. These worthless JERKS like THE ENTIRE BUSH FAMILY that were born ON THIRD BASE and have the unmitigated GAUL to imply THEY HIT A TRIPLE.

I got news for you: If Mitt Romney did not have a RICH FATHER, he would have needed public assistance because he is such a LOSER!

there are situations where day care is needed... but most people do NOT need day care and should be taking care of their children... PERIOD

Rickeroo - For some people that might be impossible. It's not like we have a whole lot of jobs to choose from these days. You are very lucky. Be glad and be kind to those who are not so lucky. Most of us work between 7am-6pm and are not shift workers. If you need two incomes what are you going to do?

How difficult would it be to work less, spend less, and both parents don't work the same hours?

The wife and I are both 30 hours a week, and do not work the same hours.

Your situation isn't practical for everyone. In many cases working less than 40 hours per week would mean a choice between being uninsured and buying outrageously expensive open market health insurance.

Not every work environment lends itself to working non-traditional hours. My personal experience of "flexible hours" is that you can wind up working some pretty crazy schedules.

Spend less? I love this idea that if you're a two career household you must flush money down the toilet. Plenty of people have cut the fat from their budget and still can't live even a simple life on one income.

gday it started when the government stepped in and issued "protections" stating that 1 person can only watch X children. It sounds good in theory until you realize that this equates to more attendents being required to watch children...ie higher costs.

My spouse and I both work ~60 hours per week in salaried, non-shift jobs. We put our son to bed and then work more at home. We too live in an expensive area (Baltimore). Not having our son in child care is simply not an option; beyond that, we feel that he benefits immensely from his preschool. FYI, we paid about $14,000 last year. Baltimore has plenty of citizens below the poverty line, but even those above it couldn't pay that much. In other words, people who work full time can't afford this expense. Having a lot of children in the Mid Atlantic has become something of a privilege. That's just twisted.

The way things are going, there won't be poor people because there won't be aid.

May24, sorry to burst your bubble, but anyone who truly cares about their children, will limit the number they have. 7 billion people is enough already. We are humans, and need to start using our brains for something more than the mindless drive to continue to overbreed, and start caring more about future generations. I don't see you wanting to leave your child with the legacy of watching his grandchildren having to deal with all the pollutants we have left, as well as what a couple extra billion people will leave.

wd401

I take issue with, men, men ,men. Fact is this.if you can't afford a child.....DON'T HAVE ONE!

Abortion is available. Your gender needs to take responsibility for it's own actions.

Don't think so 11,000 different abortions bills has been passed across this nation in just the last 2 years.

So now I guess it is only the rich that can have children using phases like if you can not afford a child do not have one what a idoit.

So tell me if and when or how much should a oerson have to make to be able to afford a child, 250,000 a tear 20,000-60,000 a year.

Come on now sooner or later, things have to become more equal the high costs of services and materials and the cost of wages has to equal the cost of living. We use to be a system that where prices could not go up unless wages went up where did this go. There use to be price wars; one company would lower their price so others would too. This country is returning to a time that showing kindness, compassion, or approachability is inappropriate.

Yeahm, bad ol men all running this country while we keep our women folk barefoot and pregnant... Like Nancy Pelosi who is by many accounts the most powerful woman in America... Bad Hillary Clinton, who very nearly became President of the US... Bad Rachel Ray, Bad Oprah, Bad Martha Stewart who make millions of dollars... Bad Snooki and Bad Kim Kardashian... Bad Ann Hathaway... Bad Hallie Berry... Bad to all you women dentists and doctors and lawyers and Prosecutors and all you politicians with breasts at the local and national level....

The feminists arguments are just tired and old and no longer hold water. If you have an issue with men in power then take it up with my accountant who is a woman or the doctor who brought my son into the world who is a woman or the female minister who officiated at my best friends wedding. Or maybe complain to JK Rowling the most successful author of all time who happens to be a woman.

Or maybe just stop blaming men for all the problems in the world when there is as much blame to go around to women also. Yo u k now, all those women who let themselves be exploited, all those women who enter their daughters in sexualized beauty pageants, all those women who sleep with the men who leave time and time again and keep having fatherless children.

Really wd401??? You are going to throw abortion into this and don't have kids if you can't afford them?!?! Every person has a different situation, when I became pregnant with my littlest one I was engaged to his daddy, we both had jobs and were making good money. Everything was going like it should be then bamm daddy decides he wants to be single and I get laid off 3 months after having the baby. Now daddy has no job, does not pay child suppor nor does he help and I have been unemployed for 6 months and not for lack of trying, I submit on average 50 resumes a week. Yes I could go to the grocery store or a fast food resturant and get a job at min. wage but by the time I pay for weekly childcare and the gas to and from work it would actually cost me to have a job. If I could get a little childcare help then it would allow me to go back into the workforce and I do not care if in Dec. I was making $50k a year and now only $20k but I have to be able to afford to work. Luckly my oldest can babysit once summer hits and I can get something but to judge is not your place. You do not know people situations and yes some abuse but others have just had a hiccup in life and need a little help until they can get over the hump. As for the daycare assistance atleast these people are working and not just milking the system and sitting at home and having more kids to stay on the assistance. I think less money should go to welfare and more money to these types of assistance programs.

A couple makes higher than median income. They have a baby. One year later, one or both parents loses a job, and unable to find another immediately. One parent is finally hired, but since the family has depleted their savings, they cannot afford daycare to start their new job. The parents are now stuck with daycare expenses they cannot afford. There are no family members or friends to watch the child when the parent first goes back to work. They are stuck in a catch-22: they can't afford daycare so they can work, but can't work to afford daycare. Eliminating this catch-22 and offering temporary assistance is reasonable and beneficial to society.

How does abortion fit anywhere into this equation?

@wd401

I guess women have no culpability in having the children right ?

Good grief. I have the solution! No more sex, wd401!. That'll fix everything! Then you won't have to worry about us silly women getting pregnant and having babies, and wrecking the world.

Lysistrata!

NO. TAX THE RICH. They used the resources of our country to get the wealth. NOBODY is a self made man. You need roads, an educated workforce and security to make the wealth, PAY FOR IT.

Easy enough. A level playing field. Everyone STARTS OUT POOR. NO ESTATES. A 100% ESTATE TAX.

There you go Mr. Mitt "My Daddy is richer than your Daddy" Romney. If THIS were the law, we wouldn't have to put up with the LIKES OF YOU!

And how many unmarried teen pregnancies and births were there last year in the U.S?

Blue Unicorn....you've almost got it!

Have sex , be cautious, use the pill!\Insist on condoms!

You kids really don't know how to have a civil discussion discussing anything. I'm so sick of people calling everyone who needs aid or at least struggles to stay off aid a whore. I married first, then had kids and the bum ran off. I finished raising them alone. Now I raise two that aren't mine, alone. Like a lot of foster and adoptive families. Except I get no stipends, medical care etc even though one is special needs. Considering 50% of marriages end in divorce, half of you women will likely see poverty or near poverty down the road, if it hasn't happened already. So stop being so petty and backstabbing and help look for solutions. Nancy Pelosi and Hillary don't give a rat's a$$ about average women. They are on power trips like most of the men in DC. Help each other ladies, because no one else will.

What do you want, a free ride? Take out your calculator. If one person takes care of your kid 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, and getting minimum wage, that is $290 a week assuming the daycare person works for herself.

So if one spouse has to work full time to pay for day care, WHAT"S THE POINT, financially? One should stay home.

Maybe they could take on a job as a day care provider at home... They are with their child and make money.

Road Warrior

Your rant makes no sense with regards to my post. I stated it is expensive, and it is. I stated that it takes almost the entire income of one of the adults, and it does. I stated they pay weather the child is there or not, and they do. I questioned how a single parent manages, and the answer eludes me.

@roadwhatever: First, you don't want someone that's making minimum wage to be responsible for your child's health and wellbeing 8 hours a day. It's also 9-10 hours a day b/c corporations don't pay for lunch time anymore so the workday is 8-5 then you have drive time. The daycare that typically pays minimum wage are the places that children are warehoused and taught very little and get very little care. You want your child to die a shaken baby syndrome leave them with a person that makes $6 an hour to care for them. You obviously don't know a darn thing about childcare.

Ok for the just stay at home crowd. First, a majority of daycare assistance goes to single parents.

Now for the two income homes that one is totally eaten up by daycare costs:If you have job with benefits and you give it up for 5 years you are starting over again when you rejoin the workforce. In the long run that may not benefit your career or family finances. In my case my husband owns his own small business but my job provides the health benefits for the family. So I quit then we not only lose my income but we have to come up with a large chunk of change to buy private health insurance.

Everyone situation is unique and you really don't know what it is so to think it is all so simple and straightforward is thinking like my 3 year old.

Yes, @tmr, you have it covered. I wish I could vote you up twice. I'm so sick of the simplistic, bombastic nitwits on these threads.

But hey, like I said, we can just stop having sex. That'll fix everything, lol.

tmr,

I was using minimum wage to illustrate why daycare is expensive. Since most make more than minimum wage, it's actually even more expensive. Wichasha stated how ridiculously expensive daycare is. I wanted to point out it is not ridiculous since you have to pay someone an entire day to take care of your child. I pay nearly that much when I board a dog.

Because you want them to work. Child care is expensive. You can either have them at home on TA or we can subsidize their childcare.

Or she can put the child she cannot afford up for adoption. Nobody should have to pay for someone else's child rearing. What if I choose to have a huge dog in my apartment and it cannot be left alone. Should you pay for my daycare for the dog at the kennel? After all, I do have to work and I can't leave the dog alone.

because other tax payers have paid into the government to allow you to live the way you want to. Police and fire protection? public schools that you likely went to or send kids to? roads and bridges? Military protection? Internet? GPS? regulations to make sure the products you buy don't kill you or that make it hard (not impossible) for a bank to take all your money? Ever been to a national or state park? I bet most low income urban dwellers have never even been to a national park, yet most of us middle to upper class suburban/rural folk have been to at least a couple. Why should their tax dollars fund your leisure enjoyment of nature?

Road Warrior-you are sooo stupid and probably a major azzhat. I've been in foster care and let me tell you, it is horrible. Thank God we got adopted, but that is a rare occurrence. This woman is trying to be productive. That is what social programs are for. To help people who need it temporarily. She does not want to have everything for free, she wants to be self sufficient. To suggest she give up her child is horrible and cold. Go back under your rock or into the fetid swamp that you crawled out of.

Daycare is the best way to help people rather than with welfare. Many people would rather get daycare help than other kind.

Brian - Probably the silliest set of arguments for future spending I've seen so far. So because past taxpayers have spent money for parks, I should spend future money for my neighbors daycare?

Brian this is so typical a repub issue. It's me me me and to hell with people who might need assistance at one time or another. Most of you are just a house payment away from needing assistance yourself. Lose your job and there you are out on the street. But I bet your to proud to ask for assistance, so therefor put your kids up for adoption. It never fails to amaze me how you religious people think.

Brian,

Because all of the things you mention in your statement benefits everyone. Childcare helps one individual. That is a pretty big difference

Daycare is the best way to help people rather than with welfare.

MenMeh,

Daycare "paid for by taxpayers" IS welfare.

then why should us tax payers continue to subsidize every program there is out there for the rich, don't they get enough with there tax cuts and loopholes? Where is the job creation they promised, to be provided for all these tax cuts and subsidize? And i don't mean a min wage job either, one of the problems is min wage jobs give you nothing and that is the norm now, it used to be a job for kids and part time employees. Big Business has now found a way to not pay, and offer nothing to their employees, so people now have to work 2 and 3 jobs just to keep a roof over their heads, the Greed in this country makes me sick. I was raised middle class and i am middle class . That life style has been declining for decades and if it wasn't for greed maybe people would be able to take care of themselves!

No childcare helps us all. That's the part you don't get. It lowers crime. It encourages responsible behavior. It creates the next generation of workers. And if any thing has been proven at the latter part of the 20th century, it might make the next president.

Children belong to all of us. They are our legacy. A society that does not treat it's children well is a society without value or merit.

I would argue the ONLY thing of importance is our children.

And I don't even have any.

Children belong to all of us. They are our legacy.

MJ,

How do you feel about the $16 trillion debt our children will be saddled with? Any more government programs like free daycare will no doubt add to it. I'm sure the children will thank you for it.

While we're at it, why am I paying for public schools? I don't have kids. I want my tax dollars back. I want a line item refund for every service I don't use directly. I just want to pay for the roads I drive on. If I call the police, then you can bill me. Until then, no tax dollars.

Oh wait, that's absurd.

A working, educated populace is better for all of us. When people cannot work, they are a drain on the rest of us. It is called return on investment.

Like one of the occupiers said in an interview, I believe we all should have free daycare, free food, free college, guaranteed jobs, guranteed raises, guaranteed vacations, free housing, free healthcare, free clothing, free car, free fuel, free cell phone, free television, free computer, free car insurance, etc. In a nutshell, in the occupier's words, "anything that is a necessity".

About 5 yrs ago I discovered I was pregnant with my 4th child. My marriage was in a really bad place so I left my husband and moved 3000+ miles to be closer to family. I applied for assistance and got the full nine yards .......medical ....food .....cash ....daycare .....and housing. I was unable to find a job or adequate housing in the city I relocated to so when the baby was 6 months old I moved to a tiny town in the middle of nowhere. They needed school bus drivers and they paid for my training. My husband and I reconciled and he moved 3000+ miles to be with us. It took him about 6 months to find a job but when he started working we were able to drop the housing and the cash assistance. About 6 months after that we were able to drop the daycare. In the last month we have also dropped the food and medical. We both work low income jobs but we have enough to feed, shelter and clothe our kids. Also I am home most of the day so the youngest child still gets the benefits of "Mom". For all of you who are on one side or the other of this issue, please don't forget that there are many who fall into the middle ground. I used the assistance as I needed it. My husband has been a soldier and I have worked at least part time since I was 16. That was "MY Money" I was using.....I paid into the system and when I needed it the system paid me back. We still make less than the state says and could still take assistance, but we don't need it anymore so we don't.

I hope things continue to go well for you and your family.

You are the perfect example of how this is designed to work.

Good job. I'm glad my tax dollars could help you out.

Road, someday you will need public assistance. You'll get Social Security and Medicare. As someone noted before, we are all in this together. If you would like to live in acountry without roads, the FAA, or many of the other great projects that benefited from us all helping each other, please feel free to move to Somalia for example. You use lots of things that others paid for... I support paying day care subsidies. You don't get to decide by yourself what the ALL of us are paying for....

Most jobs don't pay enough to pay for daycare.... When I had my children, it was $1300 per month (after taxes) per child for daycare -- $2,600 for both. That took the bulk of my take-home pay at the time. My husband's paycheck paid the bills and I was really only working to keep my livelihood available to me.

I can fully understand, and have first-hand experienced that most women can't afford child care on their own.

So, if your entire take home went to cover child care, was it worth it to work?

Oh, but we're all consumers now, and we have to work to consume, don't we?

I was lucky enough to find a good in-home daycare, and prices are not too bad in my area. My paycheck covers our family's health insurance (25%), daycare (50%), and groceries and gas.

If we just made the CEO pay a multiple, say 20 times instead of 20 THOUSAND times, the lowest paid worker salary, WE COULD ALL AFFORD DAY CARE!

SRS-798254,

Your numbers don't quite add up. If you are going to state things as facts, make sure they are right.

In Illinois, minimum wage would pay $17,160/year. The median income for CEOs for 2012 is $726,425/year or 42.3 times the minimum wage.

The highest paid CEO (including stock options) was is McKesson‘s , John Hammergren, with $131 million in total pay, although his salary was 6,000,000/year. This is 7,634 times the minimum wage.

The next highest CEO was below $60,000,000/year.

For your records, entertainers make much more than even the most highly paid CEO with Oprah at the top making $290,000,000/year. or 15,890 times minimum wage. These must be the big Republican donors you refer to...

Except this time it looks like the Democrats are leading the attack. Romney and the Republicans are on the right side of this one.

So single fathers would never run into this problem either huh?

Except this time it looks like the Democrats are leading the attack. Romney and the Republicans are on the right side of this one.

yeah I'll believe that when I see it. The right loves to say one thing and do another.

mj-1451595,

What states in the article have decreased funding for childcare? Democratic states.

Who did the article state was in favor of funding for childcare? Mitt Romney...

This argument really highlights the differences between Democrats and Republicans. As a Republican, I believe that this is the right place to spend money to support daycare with the stipulation that they can work or go to school is best for everyone - the child, the parent and the taxpayers.

The Democrats would rather give direct support to mothers through Medicaid, welfare, food stamps, etc. What incentive does this give to the mother to provide a better life for herself or her children.

It is stated well by the proverb: Give a person a fish and they eat for a day. Teach a person to fish and they eat for a lifetime.

Let's be honest, the Dems would support any legislation that would help families with healthcare, but Reps would prefer to give tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations (people) that support their campaigns. Reps say they care about families and "values" but their actions say otherwise. They only care about unborn children. Once you exit the birth canal, you're on your own!

SanityCheck,

I disagree with your statements.

First,

the Dems would support any legislation that would help families with healthcare

Really? All I have seen the affordable care act do is raise insurance costs, shift Medicare recipients to Medicaid, cut Medicare part D insurance programs and add new taxes on things like medical devices, home sales and more. But I guess it sounds good to the Democratic voters.

Reps would prefer to give tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations (people) that support their campaigns

I agree that there were some in the past, but in the last 5 years, the only tax cuts passed were those for Democratic supporters - green energy is the best example. The Republicans have been promoting the idea of eliminating the all of the special interest loopholes in exchange a lower flat tax that generates the same overall tax rate. I've only seen the Democrats oppose that plan.

Reps say they care about families and "values" but their actions say otherwise. They only care about unborn children. Once you exit the birth canal, you're on your own!

Regarding your references to abortion, I'll leave that up to you to defend your position. Regarding being on your own, I'd rather have families be on their own than owned by the government.

reggy--the reason we can't find a way to provide safe affordable daycare is----we spend all our money on war. there are no lobbyists in washington for child care.

I was a single mom with two kids. The State was beginning to step in and regulate child care, requiring expensive licenses, etc. It got to a point where I either went on welfare or found a neighbor I trusted to babysit 'under the table'. It's too bad your sister in law couldn't have found a work-around. Businesses should step up to the plate and provide, for a nominal fee, on site child care. many are doing so and they are to be applauded.

Truly, this is just one more step to keep women as second class entities, barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen to serve their men and families.

Actually one of the biggest reasons for high cost is the government regulations that day cares must pass. This includes a high teacher to student ratio and the nonsense that a day care is now an actual school with lesson plans when the only lesson a child needs at that age is don't fall, don't bite, don't hit and roll that ball. While I agree that day cares need have some regulation what they have to do now is just ridiculous. And most of the profits from day cares go to the school infrastructure or to the owners of the day care center while teachers are underpaid and overworked. Day Care owners make one of the highest profit margins of any small business owner yet their staffs are among the lowest paid. Only when parents start complaining about this will prices start to go down.

did it ever occur to you some of the fathers my be dead before you make such assinine comments.

kategus,

Maybe a small number have died or been killed, but most are not there for other reasons.

So what's she supposed to do. . . spend MORE money and MORE time trying to track the guy down?

Daycare for your children is already available for all, FREE. It's called public schools.

You are an idiot.

But I did stay at Holiday Inn Express.

RW,

You're still an idiot!!!!!!!!

That's what public schools do to ya.

My point fathers are men they are sperm donors. My solution is to have all usless men castrated and we wouldn't have to worry about this.

Or we could have all "useless" women sterilized and still not have to worry about this. It's not just the fault of the men--the women had an equal say in the making of the child.

Or just offer free sterilization to all men and women that want it, and publicize it.

It was, and it was an honorable one, until the media convinced everyone that true fulfillment came not from the family but from the career and consuming. And people bought it!

My mother stayed home and raised me and my brother, and went back to work when we were in late grade school. Of course, 35 years ago you could afford to do that with one middle-class income per family - that and buy a house. And live just fine.

Today, no more. It's very sad, and I think the repercussions of daycare and parental disconnect will only come home to roost in another few generations for the middle and lower classes.

Also her child is 4. Next year he starts school, so her day care costs should go down.

There is no guarantee that the husband will stay. If he stays both salary may bot be enough your statement is null and void.

Possum Red - One of the first things we need to do as a society is to stop thinking of men as "babydaddy" or "sperm doners" and start thinking of ourselves as fathers. I find it insulting when you hear this or that celebrity is pregnant and they call the father the "baby daddy". In lower income communities where fathers are increasingly deadbeats you will see a trend of women having no respect for men and of men having no respect for women and neither have any self respect.

Many fathers are tricked into fatherhood. Even MSNBC reported that at least one DNA testing facility reported 1 in 10 submitted paternity tests were false nationwide. In some communities, this is speculated to be as many as 1 in 6.

And you can't always blame the father. I've found that most of the time, she knows she is spreading her legs for a loser to begin with before she gets knocked up. And then the "I am on the pill" starts, or the "I am allergic to latex/spermicide/whatever" to try and get him to take off his protection to get knocked up. The "I want to feel you" line.

And I also feel paternity testing should be mandatory before any woman can claim child support. Not only to ensure the *right* man is paying up, but for medical reasons, as well as ensuring no more men become victims of babycrazy women.

My take is though, don't have kids until you are at least 30 years old. It seems a bit older, but that gives you 10 to 12 years to build a foundation for your future family, build a savings, take opportunities that don't uproot your family, and opens far more doors in other ways.

Men try to avoid having kids with someone when they want to focus on their work so why is it so crazy to expect women to do the same.

You must be saying that men must be planning to have kids or they'd have protection too. this is 2 sided. Men have condoms and vasectomies to avoid having kids. Perhaps they should use these options.

Wow... that's one slick slope you want to create. So at what income level are you authorized to have children by the state? Do all women upon onset of menstruation get these birth control implants since at 9-11 years of age they obviously don't have the means to support a baby. Hmm... I came from a middle class home, went to college after highschool and at no time until I was 28 years old did I make more than $10/hour. Enough to keep a single woman off government assistance but not enough to cover the costs of childcare. So should I have had birth control implants regardless of my objections?

BTW the middle class doesn't shrink due to those in poverty. The middle class shrinks b/c wealth concentrates in a small minority of very wealthy people and middle class people fall into poverty thereby increasing the number of poor.

The idea is that a condition of welfare is to get the implant. So, there is no income level and you get to have the first child without the means to support it. But once you go into the system and basically tell the state you are not able to get the resources for yourself or your child, you get the implant. So, instead of continuing to pop out children that are pretty much doomed to being raised in a poverty situation and taking tax money from other people often delaying having children until they can afford it, you are on welfare with only the ONE child and get more resources to take care of the ONE child.

Obviously an implant is not sterilization, so at such time that you go off of welfare, you can get it removed and extend your family if your situation has changed (for example you marry a man with some resources or ability to acquire them). If a man is on welfare, I would hope we develop a male contraceptive implant as well, because not just women should be limited.

I 100% support this idea, god forbid we do something that actually has some chance of working!

Do you really want to bring China into this???? Really????? They are still overpopulated. Little girls are left on the side of the road or killed because a lot of Chinese families want boys. Women are getting kidnapped because there are not enough of them to marry.

Wow what a model society to take after.

ranmarie - Did you know that no women were present because the issue was not about contraceptives or women's health but about a much more narrow issue of religious institutions being asked to pay for a service they have a moral objection with and that the majority of those institutions are Catholic and as such have a male dominated structure. You might as well demand that a civilian testify before the armed services committee on his opinion about troop deployment.

There have been many hearing even by those mean, heartless republicans where women were featured prominently because they were experts in a particular field pertinent to what was being discussed.

ranmarie is agreat distorter of "facts" when it comes to Republicans. Running second only to Obama, KING FLIP FLOP JUST TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR, and please just vote for me.

For all of you who are on one side or the other of this issue, please don't forget that there are many who fall into the middle ground. I used the assistance as I needed it. My husband has been a soldier and I have worked at least part time since I was 16. That was "MY Money" I was using.....I paid into the system and when I needed it the system paid me back. We still make less than the state says and could still take assistance, but we don't need it anymore so we don't.

$180 a week is also for one child, when we have my stepdaughter we pay another $140 every other week. So monthly we pay around $1,000. That is a mortgage payment for some people.

Why would you pay for child care if you didn't have a job?

Child support payments are irrelevant to employment status of the custodial parent.

Let me get this: You would rather FORCE the govt to pay for childcare and go out and work than sit home and collect assistance?

The only difference is that you're NOT HOME while you're collecting a check!

The problem is you think it's about YOU. The payments made to the childcare provider are for the benefit of the child. You get to keep working but the money earned by other hard-working people is not working for them.

Don't get me wrong, I know it's hard. I think the problem is that we are in denial about how hard it really is.

If we all REALLY factored in unsubsidized childcare costs about $18k-$24k per year ($1500-2000 monthly) into our family planning, I think most of us would plan our families very differently.

Extended families in one house (or very close by) used to be the norm. It isn't now. I don't think we will ever go back to that. I read a lot of comments saying "stay home and take care of your kids" well some of us don't live in a place where we can drop in and out of the workforce that easily. Everyone has a different situation. What works for some does not work for others. The bottom line here folks is that good, affordable childcare is a REAL POSITIVE for society. More people work, jobs are created for childcare workers and kids get a positive experience. Kids that get a good start are more likely to be better adults in all facets. My children have been in daycare and the place was great. They learned so much more than I could have taught them at home. They had great experiences and I don't regret a penny. I feel so lucky that we could afford it.

Wonderful post.

Awesome position!! If there were more that thought like you on both sides of the gender gap we would be ever so much better for it. Ultimately it is the female of the species that carries the child which means they carry the benefit and burden. Men are responsible for their acts and actions although there are far too many that chose not. Men also have little say about subsequent events after the party is over. If the mother decides to abort the father has no rights what so ever to prevent that nor may he require she do so, it is a simple fact of life. Why should the taxpayer cover the costs that result from a concious decision or lack of forethought. If I yield to an irresponsible impulse to buy that Ferrari should I expect the taxpayers to cover it because I need to get to work and I should get a pass on stupidity? I do get to drive it and it does look cool and at some point it could be my greatest asset, but for now I need help to make it all work, sounds fair to me.

It's good to be grateful for help when you really need. It's better when you can admit that you need it because of a shortcoming or a shortfall on YOUR part.

The real issue is that child care is expensive. It's something to budget for when planning a family. If it's not affordable, you need to explore other options, including not having it.

Childcare costs need to be factored by EVERY expectant family. To not do so, is presumptuous, inconsiderate (of the cost to taxpayers) and irresponsible.

Unfortunately, we live in a fictional bubble that says birth control is 100% effective and you can control when/if you have a baby. The only way to definitely avoid pregnancy is abstinence. But then there is rape and the pressure to have sex (which is sometimes like rape). I got pregnant on the pill at 28. Fortunately, I was well established in my career with a six figure salary, but it was still a struggle. I am so thankful that I didn't accidentally get pregnant at a young age--- because I had believed that being on the pill meant I was "safe". And then what do you want these women to do when they DO get pregnant? We loath abortion in this country --- even those who support women's rights still loath abortion. Abstinance, birth control, abortion... these are just three micro issues in a much bigger and extremely complex problem. The issue is that the fabric of our society is no longer cohesive and so systems that evolved in synchronicity no longer function. For instance, for much of history we had multi-generational households/communities where grandparents were available to help with childcare. Now grandparents are delaying retirement, or are long distance from their kids because kids had to move where jobs were.... We are terribly dysfunctional, and no one wants to take the macro perspective (because that would be socialist or social engineering) and so we continue to run in circles like a herd of squirrels as opposed to a society of evolved human beings..... The answers are not obvious because it's a big ball of mess, and it grows more dysfunctional and disheartening every year.

vallie, will you marry me? LOL Great post, and it's really what is wrong with America today.

I grew up in a home with 2 brothers and my parents. At the age of 14, if you weren't working, you only got the basic food, clothes and a bed to sleep in, and nothing more. Want a car? Get a job! Want to go to the beach? Get a job! And even more so when times got tough, it meant taking on a 2nd job, regardless of how 'beneath you' it was. My older brother, a college graduate and former military works as an electronics tech. When they had their first child, he took on a 2nd job to help handle the cost. What was he doing? cleaning toilets.

Today, I see people say "I won't flip a burger" or "I wont clean a toilet", then cry about not having any money. They beg for more foodstamps, free healthcare, free rent, but haven't even tried to get a job.

I really think the best plan would be to institute a program that requires them holding a part time job, and possibly even take some skills development training. Today, most americans are whiny, fat children with entitement issues and totally devoid of all responsibility.

@mduckworth - I understand your comments, even though I'm not entirely sure of your question of "And then what do you want these women to do when they DO get pregnant?" While I think you mean the general "you" and not *me* personally, to be clear, I don't loathe abortion (and most people I know don't loathe it either). I put no judgment on abortion at all, and I believe it should be an option for anyone who wishes to make that choice. I also wish I had a six figure income - if I did, I would be able to afford a much higher standard of living! Congrats to you!

@Jerrold - I appreciate your post - thanks for sharing. I put myself through college working 3 jobs and going to school full-time year round. I flipped burgers, waited tables, sold newspapers over the phone - whatever I needed to do to pay the rent, pay for school, and put food on the table for myself. I think your statement of people saying they "won't" do particular jobs hits a lot of the problem right on the head. So many young people (I'm 36, so not young but not old) are what I call "walking entitlement". They just wanted everything handed to them on a silver platter...and then want to complain that whatever they just got for free isn't good enough or they "deserve" better. I am all for instituting job/education programs in order to have assistance with food, rent, and whatever else. I'm also in complete agreement of limiting the reproductive rights of people receiving public assistance while they're receiving said assistance.

Overall, there's a pervasive lack of personal responsibility in this country, and it seems like it's becoming worse and worse. In my opinion (and as an example), this starts with kids when they're young and everyone on every team (even the losing team) gets a trophy "just because you played!" This kind of thinking is what promotes entitlement in our children - they feel just because they show up for something, they "deserve" the prize. It's unfortunate, and I hope I can instill *my* values into my son as opposed to what I see in many American kids today.

Have you ever noticed the more tax cuts there are and the less we spend the worst things get? We reduce the revenue that the goverment gets and wonder why we have a deficit so we take it out on those who can afford it the least. Less assistance for them which produces even less revenue etc. It isn't like the wealthy will pick up the slack as a patriotic act. After all, capitol is global now and so are they. Why should they care what happens to the U.S.A.?