Comments on: Manitoba Signs Child-Care Agreement With Ottawa http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/ Another voice in the white noise of the Internet. Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:40:25 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3 hourly 1 By: youngka http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/comment-page-1/#comment-1276 youngka Thu, 05 May 2005 14:03:01 +0000 http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/#comment-1276 Judy, Thanks for the link. I'll be sure to look that site over as soon as I get a chance! Judy,

Thanks for the link. I’ll be sure to look that site over as soon as I get a chance!

]]> By: Judy Satin http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/comment-page-1/#comment-1275 Judy Satin Thu, 05 May 2005 13:33:27 +0000 http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/#comment-1275 Tom Olesen wrote that "Day care is not like health care. It is not a universal need, it is just a widely held want." After reading this <a HREF="http://www.daycaresdontcare.org" rel="nofollow">anti-daycare</a> website, I don't think he'd be so sure that daycare is a widely held want: http://www.daycaresdontcare.org Tom Olesen wrote that “Day care is not like health care. It is not a universal need, it is just a widely held want.”

After reading this anti-daycare website, I don’t think he’d be so sure that daycare is a widely held want:
http://www.daycaresdontcare.org

]]> By: youngka http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/comment-page-1/#comment-962 youngka Sun, 01 May 2005 02:42:09 +0000 http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/#comment-962 <blockquote> But, in addition to the penalty of giving up one income, the family that chooses to have one parent stay home to look after the kids must also forgo the daycare subsidy, while paying elevated taxes to pay for the care of other people’s children. Who really has the social agenda here? </blockquote> Good point Steve. I just find it appalling that the "average" Canadian voter keeps buying into the Liberal spin machine every time an election comes up (well, never mind during election times - they buy into it most of the time it seems). As soon as they figure out an idea has come from the right, well it just has to be bad - no matter how good it actually seems. I'm going to add your new blog to my blog roll and add it to my aggregator. I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.

But, in addition to the penalty of giving up one income, the family that chooses to have one parent stay home to look after the kids must also forgo the daycare subsidy, while paying elevated taxes to pay for the care of other people’s children. Who really has the social agenda here?

Good point Steve. I just find it appalling that the “average” Canadian voter keeps buying into the Liberal spin machine every time an election comes up (well, never mind during election times – they buy into it most of the time it seems). As soon as they figure out an idea has come from the right, well it just has to be bad – no matter how good it actually seems.

I’m going to add your new blog to my blog roll and add it to my aggregator. I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.

]]> By: Steve http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/comment-page-1/#comment-961 Steve Sun, 01 May 2005 00:04:47 +0000 http://www.kyid.net/archives/2005/04/30/manitoba-signs-child-care-agreement-with-ottawa/#comment-961 I have always found it ironic that the Conservatives are often accused of somehow wanting to push their social agendas on the unsuspecting public. In the case of child care, at least, their policies are effectively neutral. By choosing to subsidize the child rather than the institution, parents are free to make the child care arrangements that best suit their lifestyles. In contrast, the Liberal approach is to favour families with two working parents. In effect, the goal is to shoe-horn families into choosing institutionalized daycare by only subsidizing care at public daycare centres. If that does not fit your needs, you are out of luck. But, in addition to the penalty of giving up one income, the family that chooses to have one parent stay home to look after the kids must also forgo the daycare subsidy, while paying elevated taxes to pay for the care of other people's children. Who really has the social agenda here? I have always found it ironic that the Conservatives are often accused of somehow wanting to push their social agendas on the unsuspecting public. In the case of child care, at least, their policies are effectively neutral. By choosing to subsidize the child rather than the institution, parents are free to make the child care arrangements that best suit their lifestyles.

In contrast, the Liberal approach is to favour families with two working parents. In effect, the goal is to shoe-horn families into choosing institutionalized daycare by only subsidizing care at public daycare centres.

If that does not fit your needs, you are out of luck. But, in addition to the penalty of giving up one income, the family that chooses to have one parent stay home to look after the kids must also forgo the daycare subsidy, while paying elevated taxes to pay for the care of other people’s children. Who really has the social agenda here?

]]>