[Yogi]

Proculation Proculation:

$1:

So, what you are saying/advocating is that rather than mommy going back to work and putting junior in taxpayer funded daycare, that she be paid a salary by the same taxpayers, to stay at home and raise the child which her and daddy conceived!

Nice work if ya can get it. Where do I sign up?

100$/month is hardly a "salary". 3$+ per day !

No one is giving me $100 per month ( or sfa for that matter),for taking care of my responsibilities!

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

So, what you are saying/advocating is that rather than mommy going back to work and putting junior in taxpayer funded daycare, that she be paid a salary by the same taxpayers, to stay at home and raise the child which her and daddy conceived!

Nice work if ya can get it. Where do I sign up?

We already have it for 12 months, some countries have 18, some have 6...

The alternative is to keep shipping in refugees and immigrants I guess. If there's a third option I don't see it.

[Proculation]

Yogi Yogi:

Proculation Proculation:

$1:

So, what you are saying/advocating is that rather than mommy going back to work and putting junior in taxpayer funded daycare, that she be paid a salary by the same taxpayers, to stay at home and raise the child which her and daddy conceived!

Nice work if ya can get it. Where do I sign up?

100$/month is hardly a "salary". 3$+ per day !

No one is giving me $100 per month ( or sfa for that matter),for taking care of my responsibilities!

If it helps people to make children instead of importing immigrants, i'm all for it. The population of a country is also the responsability of the state, imo.

[Yogi]

Robair Robair:

Yogi Yogi:

So, what you are saying/advocating is that rather than mommy going back to work and putting junior in taxpayer funded daycare, that she be paid a salary by the same taxpayers, to stay at home and raise the child which her and daddy conceived!

Nice work if ya can get it. Where do I sign up?

We already have it for 12 months, some countries have 18, some have 6...

The alternative is to keep shipping in refugees and immigrants I guess. If there's a third option I don't see it.

The third option: Mommy has baby, stays home as long as she wants, with no pay from the public trough,and looks after her/their child, while daddy takes on all the extra hours and side jobs he can get to make up for mommy's missing wages.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

There is a third option. The government gives employers a break on the payroll taxes for individuals on maternity leave. That way, nobody's taxes are paying for it. This might help ecourage more employers to take up the responsibility of maternity leave because they are getting a break at the same time. The government could also give employers the same payroll tax break for the temp that is replacing the new mother.
If necessary, legislate it.

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

Robair Robair:

Yogi Yogi:

So, what you are saying/advocating is that rather than mommy going back to work and putting junior in taxpayer funded daycare, that she be paid a salary by the same taxpayers, to stay at home and raise the child which her and daddy conceived!

Nice work if ya can get it. Where do I sign up?

We already have it for 12 months, some countries have 18, some have 6...

The alternative is to keep shipping in refugees and immigrants I guess. If there's a third option I don't see it.

The third option: Mommy has baby, stays home as long as she wants, with no pay from the public trough,and looks after her/their child, while daddy takes on all the extra hours and side jobs he can get to make up for mommy's missing wages.

That's just the second option re-worded. It's what we have now, and we rely heavily on immigration for our numbers.

[Robair]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

There is a third option. The government gives employers a break on the payroll taxes for individuals on maternity leave. That way, nobody's taxes are paying for it. This might help ecourage more employers to take up the responsibility of maternity leave because they are getting a break at the same time. The government could also give employers the same payroll tax break for the temp that is replacing the new mother.
If necessary, legislate it.

So... you would be encouraging employers to provide a sort of second maternity leave on top of what the UI program provides?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Robair Robair:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

There is a third option. The government gives employers a break on the payroll taxes for individuals on maternity leave. That way, nobody's taxes are paying for it. This might help ecourage more employers to take up the responsibility of maternity leave because they are getting a break at the same time. The government could also give employers the same payroll tax break for the temp that is replacing the new mother.
If necessary, legislate it.

So... you would be encouraging employers to provide a sort of second maternity leave on top of what the UI program provides?

Not quite, keep UI out of it. Allow enough incentives for employers to be able to swallow the cost. Like I said, payroll tax breaks would be a start.
Even if the gov't just helped with subsidies here and there it would still be a huge savings in the long run, as opposed to providing full funding.
The gov't should NOT be in the business of providing child rearing services.
Maybe they should try being more responsible with what they DO take from us so that it's more financially feasible for someone to be able to stay home and raise their kids.

[KorbenDeck]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Once upon a time tax burdens were low enough that you could afford to live on one income. Rather than taxing us more to cover daycare costs, lower taxes and give people the option to stay at home and raise their own kids. We're not ants that are to be raised in a colony.

It is not taxes that make it impossible to live off one income. It is capitalism at its finest. Homes cars everything used to be aimed at single income couples, that has changed to duel income. In order to afford even a basic home these days requires duel income, so the day of stay at home parents had pretty much come to an end. Capitalism has been drilled into our brains with basically gives us the mentality of "Me! Me! Me!, Spend! Spend! Spend! Spend money on me! Make more money to spend on me!" having children means spending money on some else other than ourselves. I am not saying capitalism is wrong, but I am also not saying socialism is right. No I have not seen the new Michael Moore film. I have been a social capitalist long before that stupid movie came out

Yes taxes need to be lowered but only for parents, our tax system should be aimed at supporting families. You have children you can split income, get priority in housing, and get a higher payout from the Canadian Pension Plan. Why? because when you are old and no longer working in theory your children will have stepped up to replace you in the work force. Canada needs to reward people who contribute to the future of Canada and contributing means more than just making money and paying taxes.

[Bodah]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

For all of you who share the same feeling as above....

Did you return your baby bonus(or whatever the officlal name is) money you got from your children?

Did you opt-out of your tax rebates for dependents that you got on an annual basis for your children?

Considering they're your children, there's no reason the government should be giving you anything so I would assume it was returned in good faith.

I think you cant compare the cost fairly between tax breaks to individual families to higher taxes for everyone if we had a national daycare system.

Maybe we should be given families more tax incentives to stay at home and raise their own kids. You cant argue with the logic at least its better if one of the paternal parents stay at home and raise a child than some stranger.

If children were given the choice I'm sure they'd want mom or dad to take care of them instead of a stranger.

[Robair]

So in theory the tax break would last five or so years, until the kids are off to kindergarten. Then the second parent can go back to work whil Jr's at school.

That's not bad. Lots of folks would probably take the tax break and send Jr to daycare anyway so they could both be working. That would be their choice I guess.

[Yogi]

I haven't yet seen it addressed yet as to why parents feel that they should be entitled to 'stay at home pay', when it is they who decided to start/expand their family.
Unemployment benefits. I don't think so! It was you who chose to get pregnant. (Yes, I am aware that 'accidents' happen. 'Accident' being euphemism for 'lack of planning!) If I 'quit my job' or in some other way openly, and purposely 'arrange' to be unemployed, I am not eligible for benefits regardless of how much or how long I have paid into the plan. Why should pregnancy be treated any different?

As a 'conductor' on this 'gravy train' that you want to jump on, tell 'me' (read; the taxpayers who raised their kids 'the old fashioned way') why we should give you a ride at all!

[Robair]

Yogi Yogi:

As a 'conductor' on this 'gravy train' that you want to jump on, tell 'me' (read; the taxpayers who raised their kids 'the old fashioned way') why we should give you a ride at all!

Just looking for solutions to Canada's sagging birth rate. Maybe you have one?

How long ago was it when you first became a Daddy? (just curious)

[Yogi]

Robair Robair:

Yogi Yogi:

As a 'conductor' on this 'gravy train' that you want to jump on, tell 'me' (read; the taxpayers who raised their kids 'the old fashioned way') why we should give you a ride at all!

Just looking for solutions to Canada's sagging birth rate. Maybe you have one?

How long ago was it when you first became a Daddy? (just curious)

Ya damn right I got a 'solution' for the problem!


1976 ( and there might be some 'snow on the roof, but there's still a lot of fire in the furnace'!)

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Yogi Yogi:

I haven't yet seen it addressed yet as to why parents feel that they should be entitled to 'stay at home pay', when it is they who decided to start/expand their family.
Unemployment benefits. I don't think so! It was you who chose to get pregnant. (Yes, I am aware that 'accidents' happen. 'Accident' being euphemism for 'lack of planning!) If I 'quit my job' or in some other way openly, and purposely 'arrange' to be unemployed, I am not eligible for benefits regardless of how much or how long I have paid into the plan. Why should pregnancy be treated any different?

As a 'conductor' on this 'gravy train' that you want to jump on, tell 'me' (read; the taxpayers who raised their kids 'the old fashioned way') why we should give you a ride at all!

Exactly, UI is supposed to be for the unforseen, not for doing what comes naturally.