Childcare Reform Act (Debating) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 09:19:11 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Childcare Reform Act (Debating) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Childcare Reform Act (Debating)  (Read 4894 times)
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« on: April 30, 2015, 08:21:45 PM »

I am supportive of increasing support for childcare... I really would like to get an idea as how much this will cost. Because, 90 and 50% for a good whack of the workforce will be a significant amount.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2015, 07:13:13 AM »

Yeah, if the numbers work out, then I've got no issue with the original percentages.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2015, 06:57:16 PM »

It would cost 6.3Billion?
But we have a surplus of 15B right? So we can afford it!

It would cost $6.3b per year and we have a $15b surplus, this year. But that's a pretty tiny surplus for an economy of this size and wouldn't take much to wipe it out.

But I still support the measure.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2015, 12:28:29 AM »

It would cost 6.3Billion?
But we have a surplus of 15B right? So we can afford it!

It would cost $6.3b per year and we have a $15b surplus, this year. But that's a pretty tiny surplus for an economy of this size and wouldn't take much to wipe it out.

But I still support the measure.

I thought bore just said it was $75 billion a year.

Oh, I just read more clearly what the President said... that's $6.3b per WEEK for 12 weeks... that does put a profoundly different spin on things.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2015, 11:12:06 PM »

Sounds like we're in a better position to offer a grant or a tax credit instead.

I would say some kind of means tested tax credit or offset would be the most simple way.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2015, 08:29:26 PM »

Yeah, I'm still fine with this assuming the cost estimates from Bore or Cranberry are correct. We shouldn't get obsessive about maintaining the budget surplus and throw aside a great bill like this one in the process. If that really is a top priority, then (once again) I am sure there's some silly appropriation or some older law we can remove from the books.

And I think if we were to pursue an alternative route, subsidizing decent, reasonable-cost childcare providers would be a better route than a tax credit.


But, wouldn't that be how those subsidies would operate?
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2015, 07:25:22 PM »

If I perfectly understand, if every child went every week the cost would be of 75 billion per year. But a more realistic estimate is of 40-45 billion per year.

Now, we have a surplus of 15 billion. I think that this is a sensible reform, but at the same time I think we should have a surplus for emergency cases and so I'm skeptical about the cost of it.

I completely support the intention and the desired results of this Bill. However, I'm wary of under-appropriating this Bill. Because, it might be that the program is more popular than we think at the moment or less. My natural reaction to these things would be to make the appropriation closer to the higher end of probable costs. Because surely, its better than to have the program be successful and popular, but run out of funds.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2015, 08:46:05 PM »

ABSTAIN
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2015, 08:13:33 PM »

What could be done is to make clear an hourly or daily rate that will be payable. Making sure that we don't say "here's some money, do as you please" and instead say "here's what we're willing to pay per child per hour or day of care" - would perhaps limit the risks of inflation.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2015, 09:49:48 AM »

The experience I have with friends etc with children in childcare is that there very much is a hierarchy of facilities. Parents will register their children at X Centre as soon they know they're pregnant. And this isn't isolated.

But that's more for infants - childcare/activity centres for older children aren't that problematic
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2015, 09:02:10 PM »

Yankee does have a point with that, yes. I guess if we included provisions that state they should search the logistically cheapest, which however must fulfil xyz criteria, that wouldn't be the dumbest thing to do.

I'm glad this issue was raised. Hopefully, by making it very very clear through regulations below this Bill what kind of centres will be supported. But at the same time, do we have a clear mechanism as to who this will be provided?

Public servants allocate a child-care centre? Parents have the capacity to have some choice in the matter? Which is kind of why I wanted more of a direct subsidy.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2015, 10:34:06 PM »

Alright... what do people want to do about this.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2015, 01:03:00 AM »

AYE
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 14 queries.