Return of Ford Nation

[Mad Mike]

I love the idea

But the world is more ****ed up. People don't look into other people's business. People pay less attention to their "jobs" and responsibilities. I was lucky, we found a home daycare at reasonable price for my 1st kid who ended up with the good ol' scenario of a mom who didn't go back to work after her 2nd kid. With my now 2nd one, we're looking at options now and it's a freak show. Even if they're licensed, doesn't mean you can trust them either. The bigger "pens" cost 3/4 of my mortgage to watch my kid.......... and that doesn't include pre and after school care for the older one.

Yes something should be done, but what she's offering isn't the solution.

I don't think the world is f**** up. I think what happened in Ontario is the regulation drove cost so high that it opened opportunities for bottom feeders to game the system.

The province still allows 'unlicensed daycare', but over the years they have stigmatized excessively regulated it -- it's not a popular choice for young moms (or dads) to use day care as a form of self employment.

 

[crankcall]

My kids went to an "in home" daycare, it was outstanding, meals were good and we knew the people well. It was an outstanding experience.

Times have changed. In house can be a fearful proposition for both parties, unless you know them personally. But if "ms jones" decides to run an in home daycare, will the province fund her?? not a chance, funding will go to licenced municipal daycares.

Wait lists in Missisauga are 85%, Brampton 88%,in KW 100% of daycare facilities have a wait list. Where the heck are the spaces coming from?? let alone funding money. The argument that if its 85% full ,there is 15% open, sure if you have to drive clear across the city to drop/pickup for that open spot.

My friends are, him, high school dept head, her engineer. They are debating a second child, not sure its financially do able. That's messed up.

 

[Mad Mike]

My kids went to an "in home" daycare, it was outstanding, meals were good and we knew the people well. It was an outstanding experience.

Times have changed. In house can be a fearful proposition for both parties, unless you know them personally. But if "ms jones" decides to run an in home daycare, will the province fund her?? not a chance, funding will go to licenced municipal daycares.

Wait lists in Missisauga are 85%, Brampton 88%,in KW 100% of daycare facilities have a wait list. Where the heck are the spaces coming from?? let alone funding money. The argument that if its 85% full ,there is 15% open, sure if you have to drive clear across the city to drop/pickup for that open spot.

My friends are, him, high school dept head, her engineer. They are debating a second child, not sure its financially do able. That's messed up.

This is a classic example of how Govt can really mess up something simple. If you're reading this forum you probably had your childhood daycare in someones home, not in a commercial day care facility.

Solving the daycare problem seems easy to me.

1) Create a short, reasonable set of requirements and limitations for home day care.
2) Make it easy for churches and community coops to create their own 'Home Care' cooperatives.
3) Provide simple but practical handbook and online lessons to support home care providers and parents.
4) Have them register to be 'Licenced Home Care' providers. Make licencing simple to get, but hard to renew when revolked. Remove the stigma associated with 'unlicenced daycare'.
5) Promote this a a viable option parents looking to stay at home, and for those looking for family oriented home care.

This could be done at a low cost. It doesn't need inspectors and a huge bureaucracy, parents and community do the vetting.

Like 20 years ago, I'll bet there are lots of parents willing to take in a few kids in order to stay home with their own. Legitimize their work, remove the 'underground' stigma of being unlicensed, and remove unfounded fears of legal and regulatory punishments. Seems a lot more practical then Wynne's approach that costs billions and makes nobody satisfied.

 

[Baggsy]

One of our kids' old nanny's is over in France now with her new family.
The husband got a promotion, so they packed up everyone including her.

Is Justin still using two nannies?

 

[LePhillou]

I don't think the world is f**** up. I think what happened in Ontario is the regulation drove cost so high that it opened opportunities for bottom feeders to game the system.

The province still allows 'unlicensed daycare', but over the years they have stigmatized excessively regulated it -- it's not a popular choice for young moms (or dads) to use day care as a form of self employment.

What i mean by more f'ed up is back in the day, the community was closer together. Shady people or people with weird practices were ousted, word would get out and people would know what to expect. Where as now, due to the higher level of privacy, you don't really know what happens behind closed doors, and your 1 year old won't know how to tell you.
And if you go with word of mouth for unlicensed well, word of mouth works so they're usually already full. And with kijiji ads you never know what you're gonna get.

It's not as easy or obvious to trust thy neighbor, i did hit the jackpot and us and our neighbors are really close together (we have dinners together a few times in the month, our kids play together) But in general, a lot of people don't even know their neighbors and don't give a f* about them. Communities tend to revolve around belief or ethnicity or even around age group/stage in life (the parents with kids stick together, the others DGAF) so it's hard to build a sense of trust and a system of communication.

I agree with you, something has to be done to entice this type of "business" to be encouraged more but the how is still going to be the big puzzle, since the system was broken yeaaaars ago.

 

[GreyGhost]

What i mean by more f'ed up is back in the day, the community was closer together.

I think that is due a lot to the crazy real estate market. In my parents day, you'd get married, live in an apartment for a few years and then buy your forever home and have kids. Now people are moving every 5 to 10 years either to upsize as they couldn't afford a forever home to start or to unlock some of the capital that has built up in their house. When you have most of a neighbourhood churning it's hard to build the same sense of community. Even the long term people feel displaced as there are only a few of them left and they see the churn all around them.

 

[J_F]

^^

wisdom, as usual GG

 

[Jayv]

Back in the 80s when I was a small child, my mother was able to stay home with three kids until we were all of school age. My father only worked. The 1 income was enough to feed us, pay for house, and buy more properties. Those days are long gone my friends. Unless 1 earner is pulling in 200gs a year, maybe 1 parent can stay home and take care of kids. That's part of the problem imo

I have friends who's wives stay home because it's not worth it for them to go to work and pay for daycare. They're surviving though lol.

The sad thing is the younger generation will be paying for this or us in our taxes. Most don't see this and just see the "free" daycare. It's a sly move on her part.

She/Libs had 15 years to do something....NOW they realize there's a problem? Where is the money going to come from? My A** has been both lubed and taken dry too many times already lol there's no money left in there ☺
I also don't believe people with no kids should be fronting the full bill for people with children either.

Announcing money here, money there, and spending like a drunken cowboy in a saloon ain't gonna cut it. I see through those games already. It's a last ditch effort on her part.

My son is now 21, we made a decision to have my wife stay at home. We figured if she went back to work she would paying a chunk of coin on commuting,clothing,food etc etc. Also if we were bringing a kid into this world we would rather we brought him up not some random stranger.

Wife did various things at home to make an extra buck to help out, financially it was tough.

Ontarian's, don't bring kids into this world if you can't afford them, for sure our government can't afford to help out right now.



Bottom line is if you can't afford kids don't have them.

 

[LiNK666]

My son is now 21, we made a decision to have my wife stay at home. We figured if she went back to work she would paying a chunk of coin on commuting,clothing,food etc etc. Also if we were bringing a kid into this world we would rather we brought him up not some random stranger.

Wife did various things at home to make an extra buck to help out, financially it was tough.

Ontarian's, don't bring kids into this world if you can't afford them, for sure our government can't afford to help out right now.



Bottom line is if you can't afford kids don't have them.

Some people use kids as a government lottery.

 

[Mad Mike]

I don't know if it's tougher now than it was 30 years ago. I bought my first house on the outskirts of Newmarket in 86. Put 13k down, had a mortgage of 120K that cost me $1350/mo (13.5% interest in those days). I made 30K a year, mortgage, taxes and utilities took my entire salary, my wife made the same that covered everything else.

If my kids bought that house today, they would pay about $750 for the same house. With 10% down, their monthly mortgage would be $3300 -- he has a similar job to what I had at the time, he takes home around $3600/mo making his carrying cost exactly the same as mine 30 years ago. 2 people can still affors that beginner 3 br bungalow outside the city.

The difference I see between then and now is more young families were prepared to eat Kraft dinner and drink Laker beer for a few years. No trips to Mexico, no fancy cars, no weekends at Tremblant. Oh, one more thing -- it was pretty hard to live at home with a job at 28yrs old.

I don't mean to sound like an old fart, but my generation didn't have it any easier.

 

[Mad Mike]

My son is now 21, we made a decision to have my wife stay at home. We figured if she went back to work she would paying a chunk of coin on commuting,clothing,food etc etc. Also if we were bringing a kid into this world we would rather we brought him up not some random stranger.

Wife did various things at home to make an extra buck to help out, financially it was tough.

Ontarian's, don't bring kids into this world if you can't afford them, for sure our government can't afford to help out right now.



Bottom line is if you can't afford kids don't have them.

Good advice. I usually put it this way, don't have kids unless/until you're willing to find a way to afford family life.

 

[Jayv]

I don't know if it's tougher now than it was 30 years ago. I bought my first house on the outskirts of Newmarket in 86. Put 13k down, had a mortgage of 120K that cost me $1350/mo (13.5% interest in those days). I made 30K a year, mortgage, taxes and utilities took my entire salary, my wife made the same that covered everything else.

If my kids bought that house today, they would pay about $750 for the same house. With 10% down, their monthly mortgage would be $3300 -- he has a similar job to what I had at the time, he takes home around $3600/mo making his carrying cost exactly the same as mine 30 years ago. 2 people can still affors that beginner 3 br bungalow outside the city.

The difference I see between then and now is more young families were prepared to eat Kraft dinner and drink Laker beer for a few years. No trips to Mexico, no fancy cars, no weekends at Tremblant. Oh, one more thing -- it was pretty hard to live at home with a job at 28yrs old.

I don't mean to sound like an old fart, but my generation didn't have it any easier.

I don't think it's any harder either, my first house was also in Newmarket. I commuted to Midtown Toronto as i couldn't afford the homes in Hogtown. Quickly realized we couldn't afford the brand new Minivan we were driving and financing. Got rid of that, and into a very used Volvo Wagon. No vacations, no going out at night to eat, ending up renting the basement out. It sucked at the time to have someone else living in the house, but it paid for some of the bills.

 

[klr_guy]

My son is now 21, we made a decision to have my wife stay at home. We figured if she went back to work she would paying a chunk of coin on commuting,clothing,food etc etc. Also if we were bringing a kid into this world we would rather we brought him up not some random stranger.

Wife did various things at home to make an extra buck to help out, financially it was tough.

Ontarian's, don't bring kids into this world if you can't afford them, for sure our government can't afford to help out right now.

Bottom line is if you can't afford kids don't have them.

Swap genders, but we did the same. My son is now 16, and Autistic - struggled greatly at school. I 'got' him better than my wife did, so I called it quits on a corporate career, and carved out a (now) well paying niche job from home. Zero regrets.

 

[Jayv]

Swap genders, but we did the same. My son is now 16, and Autistic - struggled greatly at school. I 'got' him better than my wife did, so I called it quits on a corporate career, and carved out a (now) well paying niche job from home. Zero regrets.

Good for you. It's not always about making the $$$. I found out with my short time dealing with the Catholic school board that they are absolutely useless when a child has special needs.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

This is a classic example of how Govt can really mess up something simple. If you're reading this forum you probably had your childhood daycare in someones home, not in a commercial day care facility.

Solving the daycare problem seems easy to me.

1) Create a short, reasonable set of requirements and limitations for home day care.
2) Make it easy for churches and community coops to create their own 'Home Care' cooperatives.
3) Provide simple but practical handbook and online lessons to support home care providers and parents.
4) Have them register to be 'Licenced Home Care' providers. Make licencing simple to get, but hard to renew when revolked. Remove the stigma associated with 'unlicenced daycare'.
5) Promote this a a viable option parents looking to stay at home, and for those looking for family oriented home care.

This could be done at a low cost. It doesn't need inspectors and a huge bureaucracy, parents and community do the vetting.

Like 20 years ago, I'll bet there are lots of parents willing to take in a few kids in order to stay home with their own. Legitimize their work, remove the 'underground' stigma of being unlicensed, and remove unfounded fears of legal and regulatory punishments. Seems a lot more practical then Wynne's approach that costs billions and makes nobody satisfied.

My childhood daycare was in a home all right; my home. Far too many people get wrapped up in the two income thing without realizing that if one partner is in a $30K job, paying maybe $18K for daycare, you're more than likely losing money.

 

[mxs]

My childhood daycare was in a home all right; my home. Far too many people get wrapped up in the two income thing without realizing that if one partner is in a $30K job, paying maybe $18K for daycare, you're more than likely losing money.

Yep. But sometimes, they have no choice. Person has to go back, otherwise a job is gone for good.

Where and how I grew up meant home day care for up to three years (job guaranteed). No less. Most take it, because they believe the first three years are what perhaps count the most. The damn cruel socialism .... Seriously, I cannot imagine having to leave my 6 months-old kid with strangers and on top of it all pay them huge money for it (perhaps the main reason we could afford to have another child once we moved to Canada; sometimes we regret it, but such is life ... full of compromises). Nutty idea, if you ask me. But what do I know.

 

[GreyGhost]

Seriously, I cannot imagine having to leave my 6 months-old kid with strangers and on top of it all pay them huge money for it (perhaps the main reason we could afford to have another child once we moved to Canada; sometimes we regret it, but such is life ... full of compromises). Nutty idea, if you ask me. But what do I know.

The states have a ridiculously short mat leave period (6 weeks IIRC). A friend had to ask for special permission from microsoft to take 6 months off with her kid. They looked at her funny but granted the request.

I haven't seen the blowback yet, but the minimum wage increase is going to directly drive up the cost of daycare. Infant ratio is 1:3 so you are paying 1/3 of someones wage+overhead+profit. No wonder daycare costs so much.

 

[backmarkerducati]

Daycare spots have become harder and more expensive to obtain after the full day kindergarten change. As kids get older the ratio (adults/daycare workers to children) increases and the older kids were a good money maker for many legit day cares. The Liberals took that cash flow away with full day—putting many out of business or at least forcing price increases at the other ages. It was supposed to make it easier and cheaper, instead the law of unforeseen consequences did the opposite.

The most expensive care and lowest ratios is infant and then toddler. This is why they are skipping these ages in the new plan ($$$S). Thing is, someone will then have to flip the bill themselves or stay home for 2.5 years, job may not be there when they come back…. So it doesn’t really completely solve any problems.

Not sure how it will be implemented but there is no reason home cares could continue (and now be funded) as long as they meet the requirements for ratios etc.

It will have a big negative impact on MLMs like Amway etc. Why???? When someone with a career or even just a job leaves the market for a decade+ to take care of their children they have a super hard time getting back in. They also find out that their now teen children don’t need or want them. No income, not needed or wanted, perfect prey for MLMs. Hey you can make all this money in your free time….lol. These people feeling useless are the wheelhouse…

In the end we chose for my wife to return to work after the one-year maternity leave. In the long run she keeps her career (no MLMs here...lol). Has had no negative impact on the kids. What is sad, there are a lot of judgemental people (mostly women) that resent that a woman can be a mother and have a career, just because they don’t have the ability or were not allowed to.

In the end, Ontario does not have the money to do it. Maybe a good idea, definitely the wrong time. If it was/is a priority, where was it a decade ago...

 

[mxs]

The states have a ridiculously short mat leave period (6 weeks IIRC). A friend had to ask for special permission from microsoft to take 6 months off with her kid. They looked at her funny but granted the request.

I haven't seen the blowback yet, but the minimum wage increase is going to directly drive up the cost of daycare. Infant ratio is 1:3 so you are paying 1/3 of someones wage+overhead+profit. No wonder daycare costs so much.

I am not sure why the ratio has to be 1:3 in Canada when in my days it used to be more like 1:10 at least (kids of 3-5 years old; 1-3 at home ...). I remember it was like a beehive with a few care takers ... the god damn socialists could do that better too? Unthinkable.

 

[mxs]

In the end we chose for my wife to return to work after the one-year maternity leave. In the long run she keeps her career (no MLMs here...lol). Has had no negative impact on the kids. What is sad, there are a lot of judgemental people (mostly women) that resent that a woman can be a mother and have a career, just because they don’t have the ability or were not allowed to.

Everybody has to make their own decision what's important to them or realistic for them, but there's no denying that staying at home longer is more beneficial to the child. Studies support that over and over and over (that's one of the reasons many countries do it ... not because they don't know what to do with money burning a hole in their pocket). Of course there are exceptions to everything, but I am talking about functional family who cares about early development of their kids.