Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Momto6inIN

10 hour school day?

Recommended Posts

On 11/8/2019 at 8:53 PM, Bluegoat said:

I also tend to thing programs like these are really a band-aid solution, and have consequences beyong the imediate help they give to families (assuming they are actually well run.)

There is a lot of practicality IMO to having some before and after school care available at low cost, in a school designed for that kind of use or in a nearby place.

But the underlying problem has been the pushing of people into being largely two income families.  And whatever anyone would like, it's not just a private choice with personal repercussions, if there are many two income families it affects the functioning of the overall economy.  So at some level we have to ask the question, what do we want to be normative, families requiring two full incomes to get by, or one, or one and a half, or something else?  While there will always be exceptions and demographic differences society can encourage the model we want to make most common.

The fact is that as soon as very cheap childcare is available for extended hours it becomes difficult for parents to say no to working more, particularly working class families.  It also becomes much easier for employers to become less flexible and more demanding of employees.  This changes the face of communities.

 

Yes. I think we can’t have this conversation without also discussing this. 

 

While we discuss potebtial benefits to an extended school day with government run, parent absent programs, we must also ask, are there unintended consequences to the availability of such programs. 

Sigh. 

So the question become, how do we create a “fix” so that more parents are available to be home and engaged when their kids are home? And can we? 

People have a tendency to choose good ‘nuff over better or best. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:

 

So the question become, how do we create a “fix” so that more parents are available to be home and engaged when their kids are home? And can we? 

People have a tendency to choose good ‘nuff over better or best. 

I’m not sure there is a governmental solution. It’s in the government’s interest to have all able bodied people working from a tax revenue perspective. As a stay at home mom, I’m not contributing anything to the tax coffers, as I don’t earn income; nor the consumer economy, as I continually cut cost to make the single income work. Our vacations are few, meals out non existent, we buy second hand. So class differences aside, the SAHM might be something society wants, but not the governmental powers-that-be. 

Edited by SamanthaCarter
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SamanthaCarter said:

I’m not sure there is a governmental solution. It’s in the government’s interest to have all able bodied people working from a tax revenue perspective. As a stay at home mom, I’m not contributing anything to the tax coffers, as I don’t earn income; nor the consumer economy, as I continually cut cost to make the single income work. Our vacations are few, meals out non existent, we buy second hand. So class differences aside, the SAHM might be something society wants, but not the governmental powers-that-be. 

That is such an interesting insight - I had not thought of that before!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SamanthaCarter said:

I’m not sure there is a governmental solution. It’s in the government’s interest to have all able bodied people working from a tax revenue perspective. As a stay at home mom, I’m not contributing anything to the tax coffers, as I don’t earn income; nor the consumer economy, as I continually cut cost to make the single income work. Our vacations are few, meals out non existent, we buy second hand. So class differences aside, the SAHM might be something society wants, but not the governmental powers-that-be. 

Right, but you're also churning out future earners, and educating them so that they can be functional members of society. You also perform a chunk of unpaid labor that allows wage earners to be more effective.  You still provide value to the economy. 🙂 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, EmseB said:

I feel like I live on a different planet than a lot of lawmakers and child safety advocates. Then again, in the intro to the article a case was cited where a mom left three kids ages 6mo to 4yo. That's demonstrably negligent. A 4yo can't care for an infant. But arresting a mom for leaving a 7yo for 45 minutes is nutso in the other direction.

 

Honestly, I feel like I live on a different planet than even people on this board. Our culture is simply different up here in Alaska. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am often interested in what the rest of the world looks like but that is the problem with big Federal programs, they affect different regions in different ways, some positive and some negative.  To give grants so that locals can structure things in a way that makes sense for their area is one thing but depending on how specific the proposal is and what hoops are needed to get the grant can make a huge difference on how it affects communities. Bottom up solutions (sometimes with Federal funds and sometimes not) are usually better.  I guess I need to go actually read the proposal now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SamanthaCarter said:

I’m not sure there is a governmental solution. It’s in the government’s interest to have all able bodied people working from a tax revenue perspective. As a stay at home mom, I’m not contributing anything to the tax coffers, as I don’t earn income; nor the consumer economy, as I continually cut cost to make the single income work. Our vacations are few, meals out non existent, we buy second hand. So class differences aside, the SAHM might be something society wants, but not the governmental powers-that-be. 

 

I think that this is why the momentum has been towards all able bodied adults working, and governments in many places have been willing to take on socialised childcare.  It's a view of the citizens being a worker-unit.

I wonder though if that really works in the end.  Not only is there a requirement to organise childcare, it becomes a problems for eldercare, care of the disabled.  there are health outcomes related to things that are connected - use of off the shelf food, less exercise.  Fewer people doing necessary volunteer work.  Even looking at environmental concerns, lack of time is a big factor in terms of people living more sustainably.

If you could really pencil it all out I wonder how much better it really is even in pure economic terms to have all adults at work.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

 

If you could really pencil it all out I wonder how much better it really is even in pure economic terms to have all adults at work.

My nerdy side LOVES this question. 😂❤️🤣👍🏻

Edited by SamanthaCarter
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I think that this is why the momentum has been towards all able bodied adults working, and governments in many places have been willing to take on socialised childcare.  It's a view of the citizens being a worker-unit.

I wonder though if that really works in the end.  Not only is there a requirement to organise childcare, it becomes a problems for eldercare, care of the disabled.  there are health outcomes related to things that are connected - use of off the shelf food, less exercise.  Fewer people doing necessary volunteer work.  Even looking at environmental concerns, lack of time is a big factor in terms of people living more sustainably.

If you could really pencil it all out I wonder how much better it really is even in pure economic terms to have all adults at work.

 

Or even, all adults at work all the time. 

It's weird to me that we're living in this brave new world of tech and automation, and yet people are still forced into a model of work that is f/t, 9-5 (more like 8-6, once you count overtime and commute) or they will count the financial and career costs. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

Or even, all adults at work all the time. 

It's weird to me that we're living in this brave new world of tech and automation, and yet people are still forced into a model of work that is f/t, 9-5 (more like 8-6, once you count overtime and commute) or they will count the financial and career costs. 

 

 

So - not to sound like a nutter but there is a reason for this IMO.

In capitalism, it is through having employees that capital owners can become rich.  They essentially are skimming off the productivity of the people they employ. That is the only way that someone like Jess Bzos could become so rich compared to everyone else, or that such a large proportion of wealth could be help by a fraction of the people.  They clearly are not actually that much more productive themselves and its built into capitalism to work that way.

There is zero reason people like that, and by extension the state that is dependent on them, would want to change the model.  And if they do it will be to something like universal income where there is still that dependency and ability of capitalists to determine what those on the bottom who aren't working get to keep.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...