I would like to propose a funded daycare system. With the current issue of low births and lack of marriages succeeding, I propose that the goverment help fund the daycare system.
Currently there is a one year waitlist for daycare. Daycare isnt affordable to many which creates a finacial hardship on families. I feel there isn’t enough attention facing these struggles on young families, if we can fund transgender hair removal or sex changes we should be able to fund a successful daycare system.
Mrs McMahon of the Department of Education has dismantled a failing educational sytem and her next job should be working on a country wide daycare sytem funded by the savings from DOGE.
There will be no new taxes , just funding from these stolen taxes from the American citizen.
Having a daycare system that focuses on health and education for our future citizens would benefit everybody.
This should be a priority of our administration to help working families that need affordable and safe daycare.
Please join me on implementing a program that we desperately need.
Why should people with no children, or people who’s children are out on their own now, pay for people with children? We already have the lie about you need to pay for your property taxes to pay for schools because we “benefit from an educated citizenship”. Today you can have your home paid off for 20 years and still lose it because you do not pay your property taxes. Our future citizens will be the ones who will be paying for our spending today.
And there is no money, the Big G Government taxed us, spent it, and then kept spending “imaginary” paper money on funding transgender hair removal or sex changes. That’s why we are 36+ trillion dollars in debt.
Unfortunately life isn’t fair for everybody.
Families they pay more into the system , they are raising future tax payers that will continue to pay taxes that will fund social security, sure they get a “tax break” but that isn’t enough.
Today some families are paying almost 30k into daycare and it has become a burden on these families to the point that some couples decide not to have children or only have one child.
Our society depends on these future tax payers because without them the well will dry up.
Today , there are daycares that abuse and neglect the care of these children. We as a society should not allow this to happen and do what ever we can to give our future generations a chance. I know its not fair for to the one’s that choose to not have children, or can’t have children, but unless we help these families with the finacial burden of daycare, our society needs these families so that our government can keep funding our country. DOGE has uncovered so much waste and abuse of our system, that I feel there is plenty of our taxes that could be used in a good way, with oversight of course. I understand your argument and thank you for your comments.
It’s telling that you feel it necessary to refer to children as “future tax payers”.
Have you considered that maybe we should be looking at the cause rather than just accept the symptoms?
Here is food for thought.
- The Big G Government has taken 2.26 trillion dollars in this year and spent 3.57 trillion. The amount by which spending exceeds revenue, $1.31 trillion in 2025 so far. Counting interest on the debt, our debt has INCREASED 950 billion, an increase of 23% over the same time period last year (Oct 2023 - Mar 2024).
- Let’s talk child care. I worked with a lady who talked it over with her husband and they figured out that with the cost of child care, the cost of a second car (car, maintenance, taxes, gas, insurance, etc,), food (they ate out a lot because she worked), she was working 40 hours a week for about $120.00 a month. This was a few years ago (2005) but you get the point. She was working and away from her children for $30-$40 a week, so she was making $1 per hour. She was a great worker and I hated to see her leave. I know 2 other families where both parents worked, had children and one of the parents quit working to take care of them. Yes, they had to cut back. They got together with 4-5 other families, both mothers of my friends in this case, but it could have been the dads. and home schooled the children, I think there were 7 or 8 kids total. The 2 girls I know were straight A students and graduated Summa Cum Laude from college. Was it easy, heck no, but was it worth it, they will tell you absolutely yes.
- Maybe a way out is to spend less and keep more of what we have.
While I understand there has been a tremendous hardship created for families, when both the father and mother work outside the home, I don’t believe federal funding of childcare is the answer. Hopefully I can concisely articulate the obstacles and objections.
- There is no constitutional mandate for the federal government to pay for childcare.
While I am sympathetic to how expensive childcare has become, or the level of hardship that is being placed on the parents who are trying to provide the needed care for their children, we are entering a era of looking at the spending that is being done by our government. The first question that should be asked about any current spending, or future spending proposals, is this constitutionally mandated?
The things that the federal government has been clearly tasked with are few, and most of the budget is spending on things on which the feds should not be involved.
-
The purpose of the DOGE spending cuts is to reduce the size of government, it is not to cut spending on one group’s pet projects merely to spend the money on another group’s pet projects.
-
Any money being spent by the federal government is money that they have taken from their citizens, either through taxes or tariffs, fees, etc. that the citizens pay through an increase in the cost of goods sold.
Taking money from one group for the benefit of another group is immoral. It is hard to see the effects of doing this when it is through taxation. If we were each approached individually and asked to contribute to our neighbor’s childcare expenses, I believe the response would be entirely different; however, some would be willing to help their neighbors. Now multiple that request by the number of families who have children in daycare and the request becomes more overwhelming. Because we are “helping” our neighbors through the use of tax money, the impact is not felt in the same way.
- Government money comes with strings attached.
Have we learned nothing over the past 8 years? Any organization receiving government money is forced to comply with the government’s cause of the day. While we may feel safe in this administration not implementing requirements with which we disagree, they will only be in power for 4 years, and we don’t know what the next administration will demand we comply with in order to continue to feed from the government teat.
We have seen what the government has done to public education, do we want them to get their hands on our children to the same level in respect to childcare? I don’t think this is something most of us would find desirable.
I don’t know the answer, and I agree it is a problem, but there has to be a better solution than inviting the meddlesome federal government into childcare.
Married couples with children pay less income tax. That incentive already exists. You might argue that it should be higher or even indexed to the CPI or some other index, but creating a govt funded daycare system is an invitation to govt brainwashing children.
You fail to mention any stipulations or conditions; therefore I consider your proposal too poorly thought through to merit discussion.
Don’t they get a huge tax credit now if they have children? That is supposed to help with the cost of daycare. We are up to our necks in debt, and we need the DOGE savings to reduce the debt. We are broke and can’t afford new programs. What we need to do is bring back manufacturing jobs to this country, jobs which historically paid good wages, and change our economy back closer to how it used to be. People shouldn’t be working in fast food and retail jobs trying to support a family. If we had our industrial jobs back, the dad could work and get good wages while the mother stayed home (or even vice versa if the couple wanted it that way). People need to cut back a little and stop buying so much stuff and going on extravagant vacations, too. And we need to encourage morals again and stop encouraging unmarried couples to sleep together. People need to take marriage seriously and not jump into it friviously. Then they should be committed to each other and try their best to work out differences that arise. Also, couples who are not ready to support a child should use birth control. This would reduce the number of single parents, and the children of married couples would mostly be raised by a parent instead of strangers. This system worked for many years, and the current system isn’t working very well, so maybe we need to try to go back to something similar to the old days.
Like college, people without children shouldn’t have to fund day care tuition. Day care is getting so expensive that it hardly pays to work, and day care workers sre not paid living wages . And I don’t want other people with values different than mine raising my grandchildren or the next generation at any cost.
I’d rather see families earn more working less. For example a 4 day work week, or a 7 hr work day. Or ensured income that exceeds the cost of living so that only one parent has to work, Mom or Dad. Or family-friendly work environments…perhaps all companies could sponsor day care for there employees as a few do now? Enable parent flexibility.
Addressing the root causes of inflation, globalization, and loss of God centric American values would impact this Day Care cost issue.
We already have the system in place to implement this. Use the Elementary schools for locations. This is a smart idea. Helps get WIC and other people off of welfare if they can work and not have to worry about childcare.
Very smart idea!!
I understand your concern, but childcare is not a Federal issue. The Federal government has a list of very few items under its control, war, diplomacy, trade between states, and protecting the border, all other concerns are given to the state. Childcare is more of a local issue than even the state level. Talk to your mayor and county board of supervisors, if it’s an issue of regulation. Talk to local churches and civic groups to see if they can help.
Maybe ask family and friends to watch the children in a rotation. That is what a friend of the family did with the husband’s sister watching the kids a few days and my parents a few days and 1-2 others.
Couldn’t have said it better Bob
Honestly I would have to say no way. The govt has proven how incapable it is and we don’t need this to grow into another sponge like the DoE. I do understand why you suggest this, really I do. I’m just a very staunch no.
Kids are a choice, you shouldn’t have them if you can’t afford them. I’m sick of paying for paying for people’s food, rent, living expenses. I’ve worked all my life, many times 2 jobs, served in the military, paid my own student loans, and paid for my own kids.
Doge savings needs to go to the people it was stolen from.
Dennis, this has merit. But as you know, anything the federal government tries to do is a total screw-up.
If we can help bootstrap private businesses to provide competent daycare at affordable prices with tax dollars (maybe with closely monitored tax credits), I’m with ya. But no new departments or fed controlled “programs” - these never work. And NO NGOs!
I like “outside the box” thinking on our side.
100 percent, Bob!
One people without children should not be forced to pay for someone elses child. Secondly any time i hear “Government should create a system to make x thing affordable or efficient” I just like to refer to the veteran programs. Because clearly no one realizes that program is EXACTLY how government funded programs work. No one gets what they need, they wait forever, its slow and inefficient. If you want state paid for “EVERYTHING”. Theres places you can move ironically that fit that. One of those places is Canada. Just hope you dont need medical when your there the wait list even for the ER might take a day.
… people without children shouldn’t have to fund day care tuition. Day care is getting so expensive that it hardly pays to work, and day care workers sre not paid living wages . And I don’t want other people with values different than mine raising my grandchildren or the next generation at any cost.
At the risk of being labeled a curmudgeon I take issue with anyone funding another’s day care tuition. I agree day care is expensive, and I have to question if it really is worth it for both parents to be working. A family could save a good deal of money merely by only one of the parents working and the other staying home with the children. It is not only the cost of child care that is affected, it is also the cost of driving to and from work, which typically requires a second car, eating out more often since both parents are too exhausted from work that neither feels like cooking, clothing, house cleaning services, etc.
I’d rather see families earn more working less. For example a 4 day work week, or a 7 hr work day. Or family-friendly work environments…perhaps all companies could sponsor day care for there employees as a few do now? Enable parent flexibility.
Going to a 4 day work week, or a 7 hour work day, or company sponsored child care, is asking for the employer to subsidize the child care. As I stated in my earlier point, no one else should be funding another’s child care. These solutions may be something large corporations are able to do, since there are enough employees to cover the work that isn’t done in a normal work week, but this puts small businesses at an extreme disadvantage. The likely outcome would be congress should mandate any of these measures, but only for companies with over X number of employees. This would put small companies at a competitive disadvantage in the hiring of talented employees.
Or ensured income that exceeds the cost of living so that only one parent has to work.
Mandated wages does not work since you are chasing an ever elusive goal of “exceeding the cost of living”. As wages rise more money is injected into the economy triggering inflationary pressures, prices on goods increase due to increased labor costs, all of which raises the cost of living.
I suggest a more practical goal of learning to live within your means with one working parent. A young family shouldn’t expect to purchase as their first home one that is similar to the one their parents had after working 10 or 15 years, by building equity in previous homes so they could afford something larger or nicer. You don’t have to go on that cruise every year, or expensive vacations, you don’t need the latest gadgets. Cook meals at home, buy secondhand clothing, clip coupons, etc. make it a priority to do what has to be done for one of the parents to stay home with the kids.
Spoken like someone who has a higher standard of living than 98% of the middle class. I think that’s a common misnomer. Please don’t assume young people or seniors can take vacations or buy gadgets when they can’t even afford food, and live on the edge of homelessness. My heart goes out to young and old people who have been caught in the high inflation/low wage situation/constant layoff situations. I know of people with PhDs, Masters, and 30+ years of management experience who are working in hourly jobs or driving ubers to pay for food. I know of retired people that have to go back to work at age 76 and 81 just to pay bills, with no retirement left. The loss of manufacturing to outsourcing cost millions of people a pension, their home, their dreams, and their ability to save or restart a career. It’s been a boiling frog process of lowering the standard of living in the USA over the last 30 years. I wrote a book about it once in 2004 that I never published and thought it was bad then. 21 years later it’s a crisis for a large percentage of the population.
I do not believe in mandated wages either. The problem is systemic at the industry and international level and far beyond the ability of individuals to do anything personally but try to survive until systemic change improves the quality of life for the 98% of Americans. Good people in a bad system suffer. Having earned a living in the top 2% at one time as a business transformation and strategist in the IT industry I am well qualified to understand the business case for systemic change and transformation, which we are watching unfold now. Moving into the nonprofit world was our real education and eye opener for what the average American, young and old, has to do to survive, not even thrive, let alone take a vacation or buy nice things. Alot of people would say “What is a vacation?” when they are working 3 jobs, or on the brink of being homeless. Millions are in that situation after the last 15 years. Time to fix the problem
for the middle class by providing real systemic solutions to lower the cost of living while providing an economic engine in the USA that creates solid long-term jobs (no more downsizing) in new innovative technologies and industry sectors.
The one thing I will never do is lose my heart for those less fortunate that I know first hand and witness their struggle despite outstanding skills, higher education, and significant effort. Things happen beyond personal control. I want everyone to experience some level of financial balance, peace and security for their families and their retirement, instead of a minority percentage of the US population. There are multi-dimensional solutions, and its not black and white or just about higher wages. I’m very hopeful that system change underway will enable a massive improvement in the quality of life for a majority of average American citizens.
Affordable day care should be part of our education system. Instead of giant grants to use less expensive wasteful universities, spread the money out for educational day care. Start from the beginning for our kids.