Childcare costs

Pawwed Rig

Mod note - moved from the 'single life as a guy' thread as we have strayed off topic but it is a worthwhile conversation.

jackofalltrades

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

IMHO this comes across as very patronising.

fits

This was copied in from another thread and I can't edit it. I agree it sounds very blunt now out of context. I would phrase much differently as an OP.

pwurple

Good affordable childcare, and the ability to split/share leave would be our two ideals as parents. There was some vague movement towards the second one last year in govt, but it went nowhere. The first one I won't see in my lifetime I'd say. Political hot potato. No political party wants to be seen to be 'forcing' women to work outside the home.

Even a measly tax credit for it would be something.

K-9

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Scandinavia is a world leader in gender equality from what I know so it makes sense that they've thought it through. In the UK and Ireland, the traditional model is still semi-prevalent but it is being thankfully eroded.

Out of curiosity, what's it like working there? I'd be a bit worried by what some Swedish politicians have been saying regarding "man taxes" and the like but that's another thread.

I read that when they introduced shared parental leave it didn't really work that much in getting men to take paternity leave so they introduced specific paternity leave and that helped big time. I can't see the politicians doing that here!

ted1

fits wrote: »

Good affordable childcare is so important so that both parents can continue to work. I hope the men reading this thread realise this and make it an issue the government need to deal with as a matter of urgency.

I don't think the tax payer should subsidise child care, it's the same as contributing to someone's wages. If the job isn't paying enough, then don't do it.

In our case the misses stays at home to mind our two kids. Because it's not worth her while. Should the tax payer give her the subsidy that you expect hem to give to working people?

Chattastrophe!

I do think that childcare should definitely be part of tax relief. But it's not. This isn't going to change anytime soon.

Our creche costs €1,049 a month - we are both in full-time professional jobs. Would we be better off if one of us quit and minded him at home - yeah, we'd at least break even, in the short-term. In the long-term, who's going to employ someone who took years out of their career just because of an addition to the family? Who's to say it won't happen again?

I'm a mother, I'm a full-time professional, I'm also a student (currently on my way to qualifications in both accountancy - ACA - and insurance - CIP, although I'm nearly a QFA.)

Your OP nearly suggests dole rather than work. Personally, it's not a lifestyle choice that I'd make. I assume you knew the costs involved when you decided to have kids. For me, my son inspires me and encourages me to do my best in life. Because that's what I want for him.

Yes, creches are expensive. Because the workers need to be paid - my sister is quite qualified, and working in a creche on minimum wage. I'd rather pay more to ensure my kid isn't left crying and upset, while another child is fed. I fully trust our creche. I could have gone for the local Giraffe place - closer to us, and cheaper - but the trust wouldn't be there.

If you're going to invest in one thing, shouldn't it be your children?

RedXIV

ted1 wrote: »

I don't think the tax payer should subsidise child care, it's the same as contributing to someone's wages. If the job isn't paying enough, then don't do it.

In our case the misses stays at home to mind our two kids. Because it's not worth her while. Should the tax payer give her the subsidy that you expect hem to give to working people?

If there's anything the tax payer should want to subsidise, it's childcare. It benefits everyone. If you've kids, you have access to reasonable childcare, if you don't have kids, you really want to encourage others to have them, your state pension isn't going to magically appear without future generations of tax payer

vibe666

everyone pays into the system, we don't get to pick and choose what our tax money is spent on based on our own current needs, we pay collectively as a society for the benefit of all of that society as a whole because a better society benefits us all.

you don't object to paying for a healthcare system if you're not sick, just like you don't object to paying for the transport infrastructure if you don't have a car, or paying for schools if you don't have kids, so why would you object to contributing to reasonable childcare costs if you don't have children?

the results of which are going to be more people choosing to have kids as they know they will be able to support them more easily, more parents going back to work as they will be more able to afford it and (in the longer term) a larger, stronger younger generation of people to join that society and contribute to it when they are older, which (as was already mentioned) will benefit the previous generations who are going into retirement.

Chattastrophe!

vibe666 wrote: »

everyone pays into the system, we don't get to pick and choose what our tax money is spent on based on our own current needs, we pay collectively as a society for the benefit of all of that society as a whole because a better society benefits us all.

you don't object to paying for a healthcare system if you're not sick, just like you don't object to paying for the transport infrastructure if you don't have a car, or paying for schools if you don't have kids, so why would you object to contributing to reasonable childcare costs if you don't have children?

the results of which are going to be more people choosing to have kids as they know they will be able to support them more easily, more parents going back to work as they will be more able to afford it and (in the longer term) a larger, stronger younger generation of people to join that society and contribute to it when they are older, which (as was already mentioned) will benefit the previous generations who are going into retirement.

I don't argue with this; but if tax relief was available that made it more affordable to work rather than staying at home, more parents would work and more tax income would be received by the state.

At the moment, I can't see how it's affordable for the average parent to work while having one child - never mind when they have two or more!

ted1

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

Your OP nearly suggests dole rather than work.

Stay at home parents don't get the dole. Well my wife doesn't as she had her own shop but closed it when pregnant. The only thing that she receives is the Child benefits.

vibe666

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

I don't argue with this; but if tax relief was available that made it more affordable to work rather than staying at home, more parents would work and more tax income would be received by the state.

At the moment, I can't see how it's affordable for the average parent to work while having one child - never mind when they have two or more!

this is pretty much the situation we're in at the minute.

my wife is just about to finish her maternity leave after having our second child and we're in a position where if she works more than 3 days a week, after tax she barely comes out with anything (probably less than €10 for a full days work) after expenses when you include travel costs, lunch & childcare, but you can't get reasonable childcare for 3 days a week for 2 kids as everyone wants a weeks money out of you and you can hardly blame them if they could fill a 5 day place with someone else.

we've managed to negotiate a 4 day week as it's for our two kids as we have an existing relationship with them, but as I say, she's a professional working in the city basically working for nothing on that 4th day.

RainyDay

RedXIV wrote: »

If there's anything the tax payer should want to subsidise, it's childcare. It benefits everyone. If you've kids, you have access to reasonable childcare, if you don't have kids, you really want to encourage others to have them, your state pension isn't going to magically appear without future generations of tax payer

As soon as the State starts subsidising childcare, the prices will rise to absorb the subsidy -basic laws of supply and demand. We need more childcare, not subsidies.

Pawwed Rig

They already subsidise childcare to the extent that it is exempt from VAT. They also introduces a universal payment a few years ago which was subsequently scrapped. My main issue is the difference between the costs in Ireland and the rest of Europe. Why are Irish people being disadvantaged relative to their peers? It is not a small difference either.

ancapailldorcha

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

They already subsidise childcare to the extent that it is exempt from VAT. They also introduces a universal payment a few years ago which was subsequently scrapped. My main issue is the difference between the costs in Ireland and the rest of Europe. Why are Irish people being disadvantaged relative to their peers? It is not a small difference either.

Could it have something to do with the child abuse scandals? I imagine that it is a lot more difficult nowadays to get clearance to work with children than it used to be.

Pawwed Rig

Clearance is very easy to get. It is just a case of contacting the Gardai, they do a search and say yes or no.

ancapailldorcha

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Clearance is very easy to get. It is just a case of contacting the Gardai, they do a search and say yes or no.

Maybe there are a lot of standards in place. Do you need qualifications to work with children? There's also the simplistic notion that they're all money-grabbing thieves who have a product they know people won't refuse to buy.

Pawwed Rig

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Maybe there are a lot of standards in place. Do you need qualifications to work with children? There's also the simplistic notion that they're all money-grabbing thieves who have a product they know people won't refuse to buy.

You need a level 5 qualification which is not that hard to get. I don't think it is a case of money grabbing at all. For example for a baby the ratio is 3 babies to 1 adult. At €1,000 a month that means the creche makes €3,000 gross. Taking wages alone (even at minimum wage) you are talking €1,400-€1,500 per month. Add in emplyers PRSI, rates, rent, food, bills, covering breaks etc and I can't see there be too much margin in here.
There are standards but they would be pretty consistant across Western European nations.

kippy

I don't really think Creche fees are extortionate in most of the country to be honest.
30-40 quid a day in Galway in most places seems good enough value to have your child minded, fed and entertained for most of the day. Once you are getting a good service, like anything else.
Things are a lot more expensive in other areas, it has to be said.
I'd assume the costs for the provider are pretty high. The've a legal requirement to have so many staff per child (depending on childs age). Most of them have some kind of cook/chef and cleaners. I'd assume the staff costs can be high due to the numbers invovled although the wages I beleive are not that high. Then theres insurance (can't imagine that to be cheap), premises rental, rates (not sure whether they pay rates), and all the other bills that go with keeping a building at a certain temperature and light level all day. On top of that I'd assume there are setup costs etc etc.

Not saying there aren't people making money from it, but I dont see the actual prices for having your kids minded, in the places I am familiar with, to be extortionate.

There are always other options also.

Whether the cost is affordable depends entirely on all of your arrangements.

I think personally if you make the effort to work and have kids in a creche you should get some kind of assistance from the state as the state to make this a bit easier on you. Not saying it should be much - but there has to be something to incentiveise people to work and contribute to the wages of a childcare worker.

neris

RainyDay wrote: »

As soon as the State starts subsidising childcare, the prices will rise to absorb the subsidy -basic laws of supply and demand. We need more childcare, not subsidies.

Not necesarilly if the Govt go the right way about stopping over/extra charges just like they have done with the ECCE scheme. The problem for the Govt to give tax relief or tax credits to parents is that it will cost the tax man in either paying out subsidies or loosing tax income. Take it say 35 kids in a creche and the govt having to pay a subsidy to the creche of €62.50 every week for every kid then multiply that by every creche across the country. The govt and their agencies dont really give a **** about the childcare sector or parents. While Vat isnt charged for childcare the creche operators get charged Vat on purchases and one of the biggest Vat payments especially for Creches opened in purpose built buildings during the celtic tiger is vat on rent. Some creches in Dublin could be paying close to €100k a year in rent alone + vat

ancapailldorcha

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You need a level 5 qualification which is not that hard to get. I don't think it is a case of money grabbing at all. For example for a baby the ratio is 3 babies to 1 adult. At €1,000 a month that means the creche makes €3,000 gross. Taking wages alone (even at minimum wage) you are talking €1,400-€1,500 per month. Add in emplyers PRSI, rates, rent, food, bills, covering breaks etc and I can't see there be too much margin in here.
There are standards but they would be pretty consistant across Western European nations.

It must be a cost of living issue then, especially is Sweden and the UK are above us.

I think Rainy Day's right. We do need more childcare. Subsidies will just encourage these places to charge more. The same happened with rent allowance and landlords over here.

RainyDay

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think Rainy Day's right. We do need more childcare. Subsidies will just encourage these places to charge more. The same happened with rent allowance and landlords over here.

It will also benefit those on higher incomes more, so it is a regressive measure. Those on lower incomes who are on the margins of the tax net will get no benefit. It becomes a middle/upper class subsidy.

fits

RainyDay wrote: »

It will also benefit those on higher incomes more, so it is a regressive measure. Those on lower incomes who are on the margins of the tax net will get no benefit. It becomes a middle/upper class subsidy.

bonkers logic!
the most socially progressive countries in Europe have heavily subsidised childcare. Anything which allows good quality early childhood education and women (or both parents) to maintain career paths and pension contributions is for benefit of all society.

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

bonkers logic!
the most socially progressive countries in Europe have heavily subsidised childcare. Anything which allows good quality early childhood education and women (or both parents) to maintain career paths and pension contributions is for benefit of all society.

I don't think anyone's disputing the benefits of having a better educated society. I don't know if subsidies are the way forward. In the UK, the introduction of rent allowance has meant that landlords will jack up rent prices knowing that the government will pay up. I'm not saying that that's a given in this situation but it needs to be considered.

fits

I think we follow uk's lead in too many things. Measures have been introduced in other countries and controls that work put in place.

http://www.tulane.edu/~rouxbee/soci626/finland/childcare.html

ancapailldorcha

fits wrote: »

I think we follow uk's lead in too many things. Measures have been introduced in other countries and controls that work put in place.

http://www.tulane.edu/~rouxbee/soci626/finland/childcare.html

I agree 100%. There's a drive in the UK to follow the US in a lot of areas. Given that a lot of institutions here originated from socialist ideals, this is alarming. In the US, hospitals became popular by taking risks and offering a better service than the competition, in theory at least. In the UK, this denigrates to handing over state assets such as healthcare, care for the elderly, water, transport to private companies who'll inevitable increase charges for a profit.
The Fins have it down by the looks of things. I don't think people would be willing to pay higher taxes despite the obvious societal advantages, especially in the US. Of course we could bin nonsense like Trident but that'd make things better and we can't have that.

RainyDay

fits wrote: »

bonkers logic!
the most socially progressive countries in Europe have heavily subsidised childcare. Anything which allows good quality early childhood education and women (or both parents) to maintain career paths and pension contributions is for benefit of all society.

My comment was specifically about the proposal to provide a subsidy through tax relief.

irishmotorist

It's a difficult one. I'd prefer that we were paying a lot less to the creche as it's a huge amount of money. On the other hand, the people who work there are paid rather poorly for a job that I would not be able to do, a job that has a huge level of responsibility.

I want to pay less and I want these staff to be paid better, in line with the responsibility of their job. I don't see both happening though.

fits

irishmotorist wrote: »

I want to pay less and I want these staff to be paid better, in line with the responsibility of their job. I don't see both happening though.

unless the government make up the shortfall

Pawwed Rig

neris wrote: »

While Vat isnt charged for childcare the creche operators get charged Vat on purchases and one of the biggest Vat payments especially for Creches opened in purpose built buildings during the celtic tiger is vat on rent. Some creches in Dublin could be paying close to €100k a year in rent alone + vat

There is an option to pay VAT on these. I would imagine a creche would not set up somewhere where there was VAT chargeable when they can get a location where there is none chargeable considering they are unable to recover VAT.

RainyDay wrote: »

It will also benefit those on higher incomes more, so it is a regressive measure. Those on lower incomes who are on the margins of the tax net will get no benefit. It becomes a middle/upper class subsidy.

They would though unless they fell outside of the tax net altogether as we start paying the 20% rate at a low level in this country.