universal child care?

[John Dibble]

No.

[John Dibble]

No.

but having poor mothers live off the dole doesnt bother you?

Did I say it didn't? No, I just said I don't support universal child care. If poor mothers or just poor parents in general are your target group, then why not just ask about a program for such people rather than a bloated and unnecessarily large program that encompasses everyone?

[John Dibble]

I guess, but I haven't really studied the issue.

wasnt it on the california ballot a couple of weeks ago?

That was pre-school.

did you vote yes?

No, it is funded by taxing only the rich, and I feel that the rich deserve to continue to pay a lower percentage in California and local taxes than the poor.

Just kidding, of course I voted yes.

It failed pretty hard, BTW. It  only won San Francisco, Alameda, and Imperial counties.

Might be cost issues - apparently Quebec tried to impliment universal preschool. The initial estimate was $230 million over five years. Actual costs turned out to be $1.7 billion per year, 33 times as much as estimated. And this is only for pre-k, I wouldn't want to imagine how much it would take for universal daycare for all kids(say 0-12) for the entirity of the United States.

[John Dibble]

Most people make pretty good parents. WIth that in mind, I would much rather encourage parents to spend more time with their child as opposed to encouraging parent to foist the kid off on someone else.

I agree.  To increase taxes in order to pay for universal child care could make it harder for many working families, and force parents to spend even less time with their children because they have to work harder to pay the taxes.  It could even force some mothers who currently stay at home into the workplace.  I don't think this is the direction in which we should move.

Hah, tax increases would be applied to high income people, dazzleman, as you well know.

You know, the working class does pay taxes you know - otherwise we wouldn't have money coming out of our paychecks and we wouldn't have to file taxes once a year. If you think that only the rich would be paying, you're delusional.

[John Dibble]

Most people make pretty good parents. WIth that in mind, I would much rather encourage parents to spend more time with their child as opposed to encouraging parent to foist the kid off on someone else.

I agree.  To increase taxes in order to pay for universal child care could make it harder for many working families, and force parents to spend even less time with their children because they have to work harder to pay the taxes.  It could even force some mothers who currently stay at home into the workplace.  I don't think this is the direction in which we should move.

Hah, tax increases would be applied to high income people, dazzleman, as you well know.

You know, the working class does pay taxes you know - otherwise we wouldn't have money coming out of our paychecks and we wouldn't have to file taxes once a year. If you think that only the rich would be paying, you're delusional.

It would certainly be easy enough to devise such a tax system, if not for the fact that the rich are too powerful under the current system.

Since reality contradicts your point by your own admission, your point is moot.

[John Dibble]

Free college tuition at taxpayer expense I'm endorsing as well,

I would prefer it be funded via state lotteries as in Georgia, and only for those who make good grades in high school.