Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow some are saying $50,000 is too low to have children, which i sadly agree today (even though I did it). The medial household income in many states including mine (Florida) is at or less than $50,000 and if this economy has not moved wages by much then nothing will in the near future.
This means we have a gap in people who will likely have more than 1 child, the middle class. The same economic class that is disappearing all together.
No, $50,000 is not too little to have children. People just need to readjust their expectations, and limit their families to two children at most. Maybe just one.
With that income, a family can rent a modest 2-bedroom apartment (near a bus line for transportation). They can shop at budget stores for clothes and food, and "vacation" is a bus ride to visit Grandma. Medical care will be provided at highly subsidized, if not completely free, costs. Hand-me-downs are common, if not from siblimgs, then from cousins. An occasional dinner out is Applebee's or Olive Garden, for special occasions. That's the working class.
The problem comes about when people feel entitled to own a home or rent a 3-bedroom townhouse, go to Disneyworld or the beach for vacations, shop at Macy's, and go to L&N Seafood or Cheesecake Factory. That's middle class, and it can't be done on $50,000.
It's a particular problem because U.S. companies don't want to train in-house any longer.
They would rather import workers from India and other countries where it is possible to attain a degree at very low cost.
I'm not sure that's true. For example, while my kids' summer internship jobs didn't come with a tuition reimbursement benefit, they were paid $25/hour which helped a great deal to alleviate at least some of their college expenses.
Quote:
For all of our rah-rah talk, we are simply not educationally competitive.
That's a SJW "equal outcomes" US public K-12 public education system problem. I've already posted the links.
Free daycare would amount to a significant amount of money that a person without a child would not be "entitled" to. .
Do you personally use all the bridges, roadways, and schools that your tax supports? Do you go sit in building supported by your taxes just because you are entitled to?
It is not free daycare, it is tax payer supported, taxes that will also come out of the parents' pay check. YOU benefit by living in a society that allows women to work and advance in their careers and be productive members because child care is provided. And the children who are healthy will grow up to be productive members of society who will start paying their share of taxes when you are old and sick and need medicare or medicaid.
Run up all the debt you want just be prepared for the government to recoup the money you owe when it's your time to collect SS. They garnish up to 15% of your SS check every month to repay the college loans you never paid back.
Even pointing out the program to you, you insist.........either most parents would still be paying now or many will simply start paying after they graduate..........just like they do now.
Yeah, I support that program.
There appear to be a lot of people who don't believe that a rising tide will lift all boats.
They are too focused on others getting some benefit that they perceive is being stolen from them.
It's a particular problem because U.S. companies don't want to train in-house any longer.
They would rather import workers from India and other countries where it is possible to attain a degree at very low cost.
For all of our rah-rah talk, we are simply not educationally competitive.
Unless we make changes it will remain the same. So use a carrot and stick approach. Give affordable education for STEM fields and make it very difficult to hire cheap low cost H-1B tech workers from India that can be prided for by US graduates. Keep the H-1B for the truly talented and gifted people.
Quote:
I read yesterday that Kaiser is starting their own medical school that will, like NYU's, be tuition free.
This is what we need more of in this country.
" Healthcare giant Kaiser Permanente announced plans Tuesday to open a new medical school in Pasadena in 2020 which will offer free tuition to students.
...
Prospective students can begin to apply in June of this year. Kaiser said that it will be waiving all four years of tuition for its first five graduating classes."
Ah, the devil is in the details. It is only for 5 years unlike the NYU school that offers it in perpetuity. The Kaiser opening is similar to recent med schools opening in Texas and FL where the first couple of years or more are free and then they start charging tuition. No one wants to apply to a non established school with no track record and pay a similar sizable chunk of money and find out that during residency match they are not getting what they want, since they graduated from an unknown school. So the new schools lure them in with free education while its name and reputation are being established. Win-Win for students and school.
If Kaiser provides free or very low cost tuition beyond its initial 5 year free education I will applaud it. But if all they do is to later ramp it up tuition comparable to other med school sin CA then all this is just an opening gimmick.
Instead of this, remove all the onerous regulations that are imposed to qualify as a childcare center.
I'm sure heaps of people would love to be able to work from home being paid to host a bunch of the neighborhood kids for the day. With enough kids, they could charge affordable rates.
But no. You have to get licences, jump through hoops made of endless red tape, and generally be under insane government scrutiny. Stuff that I'm pretty sure Darcy from down the block won't be able to handle. Only fancy businesses would.
Free childcare is a Godsend for families that don't have non-working relatives readily available and willing, because obtaining it otherwise is so effin' expensive.
yes it is expensive...280/week
but to give it free...very costly to all the other taxpayers
now if she proposed sliding scale... free for those making min wage, then scaling up....that would be more like it
but to give it free...very costly to all the other taxpayers
now if she proposed sliding scale.
That actually makes more sense, and in addition, I'd also like to see those who participate in such programs relinquish any future federal income tax refunds and if necessary any future SS benefits until their wealth transfer to pay for child care is paid off.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
