New federal budget.

Theres only so much cash to go around and I pay enough tax as it is so if more money is spent on childcare Id like to have it in my jeans. I like the idea that I can take the money and decide whats best for MY kids. As for being able to have one parent stay at home, that is a choice we make that comes with sacrifices (If I lived farther out of town id be on a fucking farm)

Really though I fundamentaly dont like the goverment getting ther red taped missmanaged hands into anything. I dont feel the federal goverment does a real effecient job at spending my money

You're missing the point. This whole lie from the Conservatives is that it's supposed to provide parents with a CHOICE on how to take care of their kids, when all it's doing is benefitting the parents who already have a choice, and choose homecare.

If you can't stay at home and take care of your kids already, $100 a month isn't going to do anything to compliment your income lost when you take 6 years of leave. Is $100 a month going to:

• make up for lost wages for the parent that stays at home?
• help pay in any meaningful way for the actual costs of childcare?
• Make up for the minimum 6 years of lost experience for a parent who's out of the workforce and looking to return with outdated skills and rusty references?

The answer to all of these is obviously NO. Homecare for kids should be a choice, not economically forced onto dual income parents as this program is doing.

You're missing the point. This whole lie from the Conservatives is that it's supposed to provide parents with a CHOICE on how to take care of their kids, when all it's doing is benefitting the parents who already have a choice, and choose homecare.

If you can't stay at home and take care of your kids already, $100 a month isn't going to do anything to compliment your income lost when you take 6 years of leave. Is $100 a month going to:

• make up for lost wages for the parent that stays at home?
• help pay in any meaningful way for the actual costs of childcare?
• Make up for the minimum 6 years of lost experience for a parent who's out of the workforce and looking to return with outdated skills and rusty references?

The answer to all of these is obviously NO. Homecare for kids should be a choice, not economically forced onto dual income parents as this program is doing.

sorry but why should homecare be a choice? if you can't afford to have kids and stay home why should the rest of us have to pay for them?

and $100/month would pay for close to 1/4 of most people's daycare costs. i wouldn't complain. it's meant to COMPLIMENT your income as you said.. not replace it so you can take 6yrs off work.

puts on flame retardent suit

people that prefer their career over their kids probably shouldn't be having kids.

holy shit - that is a pretty crazy thing to say - welcome back to the dark ages where women have to choose between a career and a familly -

what exactly did you mean by that? I didn't say that I prefered one over the other- I just want it all- I want a career and a family-(and so much more but that is beside the point) I love the work that I do - I would go crazy as a stay at home mother (but I respect that choice and think it is totally cool)… I love my daughter and love our time together - but I also really enjoy the confidance and freedom that comes from knowing I could comfortably support myself and my daughter alone if I ever needed to or wanted to.

wow I could say a lot more to that… but really - I work at a university - with a top quality daycare -she loves it - I can't imagine why working could possibly be a bad thing? I pay $650 a month for my childcare - and my daughter is about to turn seven so I don't get any of that new government money - not that it would really make a dent in my childcare expenses anyway.

*This is what I heard, that the lower income families will be paying the most taxes on the $1,200 dollars, and in fact in the end you only really end up with $199!!!!!!! Talk about Claw Back taxing if you ask me!

Now does this $1,200 replace the Child Tax Credit that we all as parents were receiving from the Government every month for every child we have? Or is this suppose to be an added plus?

Personally, what is $1,200 going to do for the families who pay out approx. $800-$1000 per child in day care? Are they sending out a message to the populace that mothers should stay home and raise their children? Well, in this day and age it is impossible unless you are very well off and can also hire a nanny!

If I still had my child, and I would receive the $1,200, I would actually send it back, knowing that come tax time, that I would be dinged BIG TIME! Harm me more in the end, NO WAY!

NO THANKS GOV'T!!!!!!!!! Keep your measily $1,200, I really dont see how this can get anyone ahead of the game (those in the low income families!) in the life of raising a child!

:announce:Just to make everyones blood boil more so, once my daughter went to heaven, I was still receiving her monthly child tax credit, which came in handy, cause we lost everything and every penny helped, it paid for the food!

Well, knowing that in this day and age and how the Gov't you'd think has everything into place, like once a death certificate is filed, those child tax credits are cancelled right away? Well, not at all!

I went into the Tax centre to straighten things up :???: with them, and we had the worst of the worst, snaut nosed jerks, freak out on us and told us that we were to report her death and they would stop all payments! Making us feel like we stole from the govt! With out any sympathies and condolences given us, we were brought to tears:flame: ……………. how ruthless is this govt? :eek2:

Horribly ruthless!:crazy:

Sorry for the ramblings, but this was un-called for just like this $1,200 is a joke to all of us in this situation!(low income)

How about raising the minimum wage to $12.00 per hour so that most of us can at the least afford rent?:agree:

Signed,

Horrified

**

sorry but why should homecare be a choice? if you can't afford to have kids and stay home why should the rest of us have to pay for them?

So many thing to say about this comment. Firstly, I didn't decide that it should be a choice, it's the government that has been saying it (though this is one thing I agree with them on).

Secondly, the duty of any good government is to support the citizens, and promote the responsible growth of it's population. There are many, many examples of regions that suffer from low birth rates (below replenishment) and some would argue have been the #1 cause of recessions (Quebec comes to mind, as does France).

Thirdly, why should anyone have to pay for you if you get sick? How about if you want to get from place to place but can't afford a helicopter or massive 4x4? Should the government support your road needs if you can't afford to build them yourself? Hell, why should they pay for school if you're not able to afford a private education for the little ones yourself?

The last thing a government wants to do is discourage families from procreating (within reason). This is a simple political end economic fact (environmentalists might not like it, but to go against this is financial suicide).

and $100/month would pay for close to 1/4 of most people's daycare costs. i wouldn't complain. it's meant to COMPLIMENT your income as you said.. not replace it so you can take 6yrs off work.

While I think it's awesome that you live in a magical magical kingdom where daycare is $400 a month, the daycare I'm closest to is about $1200/month, and the cheapest one I can find in the area is $930.

Remember, these are kids that will grow up to be adults, if they're given the oppurtunity they'll get good educations, pay a lot of taxes and grow the workforce with their kids eventually. Just because a child isn't financially beneficial immediately doesn't mean having them should be treated as a luxury.

As a woman, if you "Choose" to have a kid and are forced to stay at home to raise them, are you completely comfortable taking off a year for maternity, 4-5 additional years to raise them (assuming you don't have more than one), and then returning to the workforce? Tell me, in what carreer would this not be horribly detrimental to your carreer? Parental homecare has it's benefits, but institutionalizing it has the same effect as deskilling the overall workforce. Is that good for anybody?