Won’t Someone Think of The Jobs?

This entry was posted in Culture, Whatever. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Won’t Someone Think of The Jobs?

  1. Wyndham Dix says:

    Young professionals in regions say ‘childcare deserts’ are forcing them to choose children over jobs.

    A notion that was not remotely present in the minds of my wife (and her husband) and her peers in their child-bearing years in the 1960s. Parents were responsible for child care, not a paid quasi-nanny and activist.

    In those days, unlike today, we could afford to buy a home on one income.

    Money and possessions were not the false gods they are today.

  2. Christine says:

    In the seventies/eighties for example, young parents didn’t have, or expect to have, all the things they want today.

    The trend for couples to reject wedding gifts and instead request guests to donate to their overseas ‘honeymoon’ set the scene for what we see today.

    Plenty of parents, who could afford to have their little children stay home with the mother, much prefer to have strangers take over the day-to-day care.

    A specialist doctor, in the early days of the Covid panic, said it would be “tragic” if she had to close her practice because of infection.
    (unsaid: and have to be at home with her little children).

  3. Rosie says:

    Mothers complaining that no-one is interested in being childcare ‘educators’.

  4. Roger W says:

    You do wonder why these people have children if they don’t want to look after them. The years before they went to school are the happiest memories I have.

  5. jupes says:

    Note the subtle change of language. A childcare center is now a preschool.

  6. Entropy says:

    Maybe instead if whinging look on it as an investment opportunity.
    Oh, you mean there aren’t enough prospective customers?

  7. Terry says:

    ‘the preschool’s policy was to conduct checks every 10 minutes

    Really? Every 10mins? Why?
    No wonder “childcare” is so expensive.

    Stay-at-home mums should be able to apply their tax-free threshold to their husband’s income (and/or vice versa) – If you want to support families then make it family income and let those families decide how to manage themselves.

    With a reduced financial burden, you might will find many more mothers (or fathers) choose to stay home and raise their kids.

  8. Buccaneer says:

    Long daycare is a petrie dish for every known disease and probably some we don’t know, I’ve seen plenty of kiddies abandoned there 5 days a week from 7am to 6pm, long hours that were abandoned as working conditions an eon ago. This comes with serious mental health baggage for lots of kids.

    They also learn pretty much nothing in most of these settings.

    Exposure to so many pathogens must have some role to play in the rise of immune system malfunction in western society.

    If you can, keep your kids at home, send them to a traditional pre school. They will have better outcomes and be more balanced emotionally and in maturity when they go to school.

    There is no social, educational or economic benefit from government subsidising this sector. There is definitely an additional load to parents and children in stress and adverse health outcomes.

  9. Nos_Pullum says:


    Mothers (and fathers) choosing to stay home and raise their children is exactly what the anti-family activists fear.

    Cash out all the child care subsidies, pay it to all parents and let them decide what works best for their family.

    Imagine the savings from all the bureaucrats we would no longer need!

  10. Old Lefty says:

    The advantage of coming late to the discussion: I can just say that I agree entirely with Terry and Nos Pullum.

  11. Old Lefty says:

    … and Buccaneer!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *