HERE WE GO: NY Governor Kathy Hochul and Zohran Mamdani Announce Plans to Spend Billions on 'Free' Childcare Program (VIDEO) | T...
New York Governor Kathy Hochul and newly sworn in New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani have just announced their plans to spend billions of dollars on a ‘free’ childcare program.
I'm sure people without children will be thrilled to fund other people's babysitters.
What could possibly go wrong....
All child cares facing Mecca and wailing 5 times a day.
Get government out of our lives.
They left out the word “taxpayer” dollars…
Send over the Somalis from Minnesota, they are experts on setting up programs like this.
Actually -- I am not against government run daycare per se. And I am not speaking about New York in particular -- but the country as a whole. But I would structure government run daycare way differently.
"Free" is never good. People do not appreciate "free" and abuse the privilege. So a moderately priced daycare program would be fine.
And I would hire -- retired people in good health and of sound mind (who have been vetted) so that they could supplement their social security income.
A condition of this daycare would also be that the parent(s) must be employed. That would eliminate those who just wanted to dump their kids off to avoid responsibility.
And while I was at it -- I think I'd have a program where elderly people could be employed and earn a stipend (again to supplement social security) to read books to small children in libraries. The could dress up in costume as "Mother Goose" or some other literary or historical character. That's way better than drag queen story hour. (Again these people would be vetted).
I'm a "kill two birds with one stone" kind of person -- and matching the elderly with preschoolers seems to be a genuine solution to a very real problem. A lot of people do need affordable daycare. Elderly people are often barely surviving on social security. It's not a bad plan overall but would need to have the kinks ironed out.
Just a thought off the top of my head...
Government camt run child care and should not run childcare. Ever.
Why? I'm just wondering what you're thinking about (as opposed to what I have in mind).
I am not speaking about some politically brainwashing type of thing like an MK Ultra center or any kind of thing where kids could be kidnapped or put into situations that would require rescuing by special forces.
I'm talking about hiring Grandma and Grandpa figures that are just regular citizens to basically look after the tots and give them a nurturing environment. Maybe teach them the A,B, C's and do crafts with them, read to them, teach them things (how to tie their shoes) etc., make sure they are fed and their needs are met. To be quite honest with you, these would be people who have "been there and done that" so they would rather know a bit about taking care of kids.
You'd have to have a "training program" of some sort so everyone would be on the same page in terms of how things would be done.
But I see less issues with something of this sort than what is going on out there now -- I've heard some horrendous stories about daycare and quite seriously once President Trump gets the country back to "normal" -- I don't forsee there would be any serious problems. If you haven't noticed -- elderly people tend to dote on little kids so it would probably be better for them to have these type of people looking after them than some of the horror stories I've heard regarding abuse and neglect in daycare centers.
Plus it would be affordable for struggling families and help the elderly to get extra income to pay their bills.
I have faith that once President Trump gets things straightened out something like this could work. Assuming of course, he was even interested in engaging in this issue. And the good part would be -- because it was run by the government these places could be checked every month to see they are being run the way they should be.
You have to view this in terms of how America could be. America is filled with millions of people who voted to turn this country around. You've got this untapped resource of Senior citizens and you've got working parents struggling to pay unaffordable child care. The solution, in my opinion, is to get them together under government supervision. Vet the Seniors so you know you're getting responsible people. And let things improve for both groups.
I'll get off my soapbox now. I'm speaking as if this is an actual proposal and it isn't. It is just my idea to solve two issues in one sweep.
Why even use daycare? Why not have parents take care of their kids?
Some gullible people might say "Oh, but both parents need to work. Living costs are so high."
First of all, living costs are artificially inflated, including massive taxes, housing, and medical.
Second of all, childcare is used by people who are bad at math and don't understand budgeting.
It's my understanding that rents are incredibly high. I'm only going by what I've been told. And please remember that salaries are not standardized -- so I don't think you can make the assumption that they can't budget correctly. They may be underpaid.
Do you really mean "parents" take care of the kids? Or do you mean "mom" should stay at home at take care of the kids? I suspect you do.
Inasmuch as a lot of people believe stay at home moms are the answer to all of societal problems, I am not altogether sure that's completely true. I am old you see. I remember what it was like then, and what it is like now and truthfully -- it's like being Goldilocks and knowing that one is too little and one is too big and neither was ever quite right.
But social considerations notwithstanding, I don't believe you can put the genie back in the bottle.
Take myself for example -- my earliest memory of my answer to what I wanted to be when I grew up (about age 4 or 5) was -- an archeologist. My parents had this fascinating series of books on exotic lands and one of them featured Egyptian pyramids and hieroglyphics. However, when I voiced this aspiration -- I was promptly told, "Girls can't be archeologists". Nor apparently, could they be any other remotely interesting profession in which, I expressed an interest.
Mind you -- I had no interest in playing professional football or becoming a fireman -- just things that required intelligence, but not physical strength.
I expressed at one point I might wish to study law. I was told that I had nerve attempting to take a spot in law school that could go to a man who would then support a family. It was assumed I would marry (so happens I did, but what if I had not? Was I supposed to starve and live at poverty level? I wondered how the importance of the fate of some hypothetical man mattered more to my father than his own daughter's future, but I digress.) Everything that was remotely interesting was out of reach due to my sex.
All the choice opportunities were denied me, while richness of opportunity was heaped upon my brother. I was somewhat jealous but more baffled as to why an appendage had such meaning -- why being male bestowed such preferential treatment.
Understand -- my situation was not unique. Ask any woman in my age group about the limitation of "opportunities". You'll get an earful about favoritism of "brothers"!
I did as well as I could for myself given little parental support.
Presently, all of my material possessions are due to my husband. I appreciate him. I appreciate his generosity.
However, I look back on my life (and I am in my twilight years) and I see a waste of my potential. My husband tells me I could have been stellar had circumstances been different. He says the fault was not mine.
That doesn't mean I don't love my kids or that I wasn't a good mother. It's just that all the dreams I ever had never had a chance because of the attitudes prevalent at the time I was growing up.
I don't think you want to put 50% of the nation in my shoes. Shoving people into a box and telling them they can't be who they are because of their sex is such a waste of human resources.
These young ladies of today -- they definitely need their attitudes adjusted in many ways, but I don't believe that the solution is to go back to archaic models of feminine roles.
Just my humble opinion --
What about both parents work part-time? With good work skills, that is totally feasible. Many home-schooling parents do this.
And maybe "men's work" is mostly irrelevant and not all that terribly interesting.
I guess it would depend on what kind of "men's work" it was -- but you have to admit most of traditional female work isn't very engaging.
I wasn't aware there were that many opportunities for part-time work that were lucrative. That could work.
Debutant- For a track record of how government runs businesses look no farther than the US Postal Service-disaster.
Well -- I am hoping that President Trump solves these issues. I'm an eternal optimist. I think we have to have faith that we can make America better again. President Trump has never let me down.
Absolutely! DJT has given us hope.
I agree.
Also known as money laundering.
NYC learng facilities opening soon!
Why wouldn't they? It's worked our pretty well elsewhere....say Minnesota for example!
Where’s the money coming from
C,MON Anons if this is NOT the WHats, 4POG, whatever then the Democrats have not just lost their minds but they are SUICIDAL! Good Movie!
It’s like how my friend in Sweden tells me they have free healthcare and I remind her she pays like 56% in taxes to PAY for that FREE healthcare.
Demonrats have to replace NGO money somehow.
What do you wanna bet they don't get very far with it? They should have tried that LAST year.
More blatant fraud and abuse of taxpayer money inc to NYC.
Should make them.rich seeing no children will get any care. New yorkers about to get scammed.
Getting their $$$ from Minnesota? Asking for a friend
Hahahaha!!!
Y'all see what they're doing with this crap??!!
They're eliminating competition by heading them off at the pass!!!
Welcome my son, welcome to
the machineClown World!u/#clownworld
Socialism
The Replacement Agenda right in your Face..
Oh boy, this will delight the harvesters of innocent children.