Author
|
Topic: Daycare rates to go up
|
RP.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7424
|
posted 10 March 2006 01:11 PM
Daycare to be $100/month more expensive quote: Several Island daycare centres have announced they will raise their rates by $100 a month in July to coincide with the $100 cheques being mailed out as part of the federal Conservative child-care plan.Daycare operators were unapologetic about the increases. "I'm putting the rates up because I believe in early learning and I believe in the qualified staff I have here and they are educators and they deserve more," said Lynn Hogan, the director and owner of Campus Kids at the University of Prince Edward Island. "For so many years we have subsidized child care by settling for a lower wage so it really has to stop," she said.
From: I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andy (Andrew)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10884
|
posted 12 March 2006 04:23 PM
quote: I agree with this action too, and I wouldn't be apologetic about it either. This federal program is NOT a child care program, it's a reward to married women who stay home in "their place", and the faster people are disabused of this notion that Harper is funding a child care program and start fighting for a REAL child care program, the better
Michelle, I don't agree with Harper's program but I don't agree that it's a reward for married women who stay at home. Some families will use that money towards paying grandparents to babysit or something like that. I don't think that's right but I don't think it's right to say it supports just one decision. I also don't think there is anything wrong with one person staying at home. Maybe it's different between provinces but in Alberta I know of people who are working in daycares that just have first aid - that's it. They have no post-secondary education or training. Don't tell me that's a start to early education, that's warehousing a kid. If people want to be paid well then they should have more skills than a first aid certificate you can get in a weekend.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440
|
posted 12 March 2006 04:58 PM
quote: Originally posted by Michelle: I agree with this action too, and I wouldn't be apologetic about it either. This federal program is NOT a child care program, it's a reward to married women who stay home in "their place", and the faster people are disabused of this notion that Harper is funding a child care program and start fighting for a REAL child care program, the better.[ 12 March 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]
That is the way I see it. The whole reason for wanting a national day care program was to make it possible for women who need to work to be able to do so. This meagre tax cut does not enable such women. At the same time, people who can already afford to stay at home with their kids will continue to stay at home, but they will get money that they do not need. The Liberals were right on this one. That is, imagine if legislators creating health care opted instead to go for a $100.00/month tax break. Do you really think that women who do not work in the public sphere and drive Escalades to their 3 story executive homes really give a shit about this program? Do you think it will do much to enable the working poor? If it does not work, then it is a waste of tax dollars. More waste from the Conservatives.
From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Andy (Andrew)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10884
|
posted 12 March 2006 05:03 PM
Cartman I don't agree with the program for many reasons - one is that I think that daycares are accredited and screamed. Most homemakers aren't going to allow health inspectors and educational assessments of their daily plans with their children. I don't agree with all you said though... quote: That is the way I see it. The whole reason for wanting a national day care program was to make it possible for women who need to work to be able to do so. This meagre tax cut does not enable such women. At the same time, people who can already afford to stay at home with their kids will continue to stay at home, but they will get money that they do not need. The Liberals were right on this one. That is, imagine if legislators creating health care opted instead to go for a $100.00/month tax break.
The daycare program was not just for women who had to work for financial reasons it was for everyone who wanted to work to have daycare spots. I don't disagree with that but I don't think that it was going to be means tested. quote: Do you really think that women who do not work in the public sphere and drive Escalades to their 3 story executive homes really give a shit about this program? Do you think it will do much to enable the working poor? If it does not work, then it is a waste of tax dollars. More waste from the Conservatives.
I know women from Church who are in a position to stay at home who fought tooth and nail for that $100 bucks and think it's important on principle. The Conservatives got MANY votes based on this policy.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Cartman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7440
|
posted 12 March 2006 05:18 PM
quote: The Conservatives got MANY votes based on this policy.
More than what the opposition parties received supporting a national day care program? I disagree.The idea of a national day care program came from the left, not the right. My understanding is that feminists were the ones who instigated this discussion because many women were (and still are) living in poverty because they cannot afford to stay at home with their kids and work at the same time. Consequently, they become dependent upon men. I have no problem paying money because folks are trying to get ahead in life, but I have a serious problem handing over my tax dollars to support wealthy women staying at home. Stay at home on your own dime thank you. I would like someone to explain to me why they chose $100.00.
From: Bring back Audra!!!!! | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|