The Harper Revolution

[cakadu]

If you re-read my post, emrald, you'll see that I fully support a stay at home parent. I believe that part of the state of affairs that we are in now is because far too many children are left to their own devices and are given "things" by parents to make up for thefact that they are not with their own children.

Out of all my friends with children, only one has been a stay at home mom and I give her all the credit in the world for doing it. Another of my friend's has set it up so that she can bring her children to her own business and they are with her.

I try to view life from the perspective of "there but for the grace of God, go I." It's great to say get rid of all the social programs because they cost too much, UNTIL we need one program or another ourselves.

What if non-farming people were to say cut out any and all funding for producers immediately because they are just costing us more and more money? How would producers feel then? I can't tell you the number of people who say to me that they should just cut out all programs to farmers and quit bailing them out because no one else gets bailed out. For example, the person who opens a business - no matter what kind - doesn't get help if the competition out performs them.

Yes, you are correct, silverback that money has been promised to businesses that set up some sort of child care services for their employees. We have all witnessed how quickly someone can syphon good money away from those whom it is intended for.

The bottom line is that the children should come first and not have to pay, one way or the other, for the choices that their parents make.

[silverback]

So if we set up another huge beaurocratic jungle to give people universal child care, who do you suppose is going to have to pay for it in the future?? Probably the children that will use it right now. Is that not punishing them in the future for something we may do now? If less people are going to enter the workforce down the road, why would we keep setting up new programs. Would it not be smarter to try and wean us off the gov't teat somehow?

[silverback]

I watched some of the commentary on the news last night about child care. It seems as though many of the parents interviewed feel that it is their right to have subsidized daycare and they want the government to ensure that happens, and not only subsidized but larger subsidies.

When my sons were growing up I was a rarity by being a stay at home mother. In fact, I had other moms ask me ' what do you do all day, ANYTHING?'. The fact that my husband's work took him away from home for weeks at a time made me almost a single parent when it came to taking the boys to hockey and other activities, not to mention discipline !!
Both my son's wives worked, but one of them didn't go back to work until her children were in school, and then worked from 6:00AM- 2:00 PM so wasn't really away from the kids too much during the daytime.

Linda, I certainly agree with you when it comes to parents opting to 'buy' things for their kids vs giving some quality time with them.

In our office we have several young moms working, they have to stay at home when their little ones are ill, many times they have to leave the office if their child becomes ill or gets hurt etc., I asked one of them why she worked full time and her answer was that her husband's salary wouldn't cover the larger house, and the winter vacation and that was what her salary was going in part for !!
Another thing I don't feel is right is the fact that a persons job must be held for them when they are on maternity leave.
We have one gal on mat leave right now, her replacement has ten times more on the ball and is an awesome admin assistant, but the other gal has to have her job back in July !!! She has one three year old at home plus a baby born last July, and an hour commute to the office, so those little tykes don't see her much in the daytime at all.

[cowman]

Believe it or not I have a lot of mixed feelings on this whole thing! Personally if the shoe was on the other foot and it was me who had to stay at home with a bunch of rug rats I'd go out and shoot myself!
However....My mother had 7 kids. She never let that hold her back much! She used to think she ran the show and liked to tell the old boy just what he was doing wrong...with mixed results...he could be an ornery old bugger! But looking back on it she usually got her way!
She never let all those kids get in the way of getting out and working with my Dad! She really didn't need to, as we always had a hired man but she would bundle a few kids up and go out and rake hay, drive the grain truck...whatever! The older ones took care of the younger ones in the nearest little piece of heaven beside the field! We actually had a lot of fun and created a lot of great memories!
Now I realize this is in no way todays reality, and quite frankly my Mom was one of a kind, where they threw away the mold! Sure was, and is, a great old Mom though.

[cowman]

Likely it took all six sisters to keep you in line cowman !!!!!
And I bet your mom had meals cooked to take out to the field as well, and likely washed clothes at night when she got home !!!! Those moms were superwomen thats for sure.

There were and are many farm moms that work side by side with their husband out in the field with kids in tow, or they do calving, haying etc, while their man works off the farm to make ends meet. I have never heard a farm mom expect the government to look after her kids but I bet the $100 per month per child would come in handy to get the odd sitter once in awhile.

[cakadu]

I don't believe at all that it is a right to have child care, after all the children are the responsibility of the parents. I agree that often times both parents are out working so that there are "extras" and I question how big a house one really needs. (Frankly I would hate to clean it.) Not all households are in that boat and many times two people NEED to work.

Today's moms (and there is no offence here) may have many challenges but I would hazard a guess that they pale in comparison to what our mothers, grandmothers etc. had to live with. Imagine 8 children with NO running water, NO washing machine, NO indoor plumbing, NO microwave etc., etc. That took real guts and determination to make it through. The moms of yesterday had a lot of pluck and they should be admired for it.

Cowman, there are some females who feel the same way you do, which is why they are out working. I don't doubt for a minute that they love their children any less than a stay at home mom, just that they have different plans and goals.

This can be a fairly divisive issue among people and I don't think there are any easy answers.

[cowman]

Somehow over the last few decades parents have muddled through without a national daycare program? I am sure it caused problems and sacrifices had to be made. That is life.
The Liberals promised a national daycare program in 1993. Finally in the dying days they announced the go ahead and supposedly cut a deal? A deal by the way that in no way put enough money into the system to meet the so-called need?
Where does this type of "national social program" take us? I would suggest $5 billion would quickly mushroom into one hell of a lot more? My question would be: Can the Canadian tax payer afford this? How much more taxes can we afford and still stay competitive?
Obviously $1200 isn't going to do much for full time daycare, but is $7/day(Quebec plan) really going to do much more? What does it cost to babysit a kid in daycare? If we have universal free daycare what would that cost the country?
Would it turn into a boondoggle like medi-care?

[cowman]

We have several day care establishments in our community and I nearly burst into tears when I see those little tykes all holding on to a rope walking down the street !!! If that is the way little ones are supposed to be raised in this day and age, I am glad I had mine years ago, when Mom was home, and we managed very well without the 'extras' that would have been possible had I gone out to work !!!