Saturday, May 07, 2005

Caviar Socialism

The title links to the Vanier Institute for the Family / University of Lethbridge child care study released in February.
Socialized childcare sends the message loud and clear:
Family is irrelevant in Canada.

Paul Martin, Ken Dryden and Jack Layton (three 'old white guys' as Rona Ambrose so aptly put it) have decreed that in their 'Early Childhood Education' scheme, our kids are the beneficiaries of the wisdom that says children are better off being raised by the state, than by us.

Mr. Martin said recently that he was only providing what is necessary for the 'new reality' of two income families. Instead of making being a stay at home parent a viable or even preferable choice for families, we get the Nanny State.

A study by the Vanier Institute and the University of Lethbridge says that 90% of Canadians feel that ideally in two-parent households, one parent should stay at home with the children. 90% is not some slim majority.

The study determined that in fact, only 47% of kids are cared for by a stay at home parent. Less than half, but still far more than the media would have you believe. And of the other 53%, they are in 'some form of care' which I take to mean neighbours or relatives as well as formal daycare centres. Some of that 53% probably have moms or dads who work part-time or shifts, meaning the care is not full-day.

Government should be in the business of making it easier for families to raise their own children, rather than making it convenient for them not to.

Don't get me wrong. Women are more educated today than ever before, and sure, they want to use that education. But many, if not most women, are not putting their kids in daycare in order that they may go off to their careers as doctors, lawyers or politicians -- they are doing it so they can work as a clerk in an insurance company, or an office manager in an accounting firm -- because let's face it -- it isn't the doctors, lawyers and politicians who NEED daycare -- they can afford to hire nannies or to take a few years off to raise their kids and know their skills and education are still relevant in the world.

Those of us who need the choices are being told by those who don't. Instead of getting what we want, they are giving us what they think we OUGHT to want.

Most women want to rejoin the workforce at some point after having children, but that time-frame should be determined within a family, not by government edict. The tax system unfairly favours two income families and conversely, one income families are unfairly penalized.

By giving us 'Universal' daycare, the state is telling us that only wage earners are 'productive' members of society -- mothers and fathers who choose to stay at home with their kids are 'unproductive.' They are implying that state run 'Early Learning Centres' are a substitute for the love of a mom or dad.

The yearly price tag for this plan has not been talked about by the government, but daycare advocates and financial experts alike suggest $10,000,000, 000 (that's $10 Billion -- thanks to gullchasedship for the correction) per year to run a fully universal programme. But what will this social experiment cost in real terms? Families already face increasing burdens to their stability and on time together. Giving us babysitters in the guise of 'early education' is a cynical plan that usurps familial authority, obligations, rights, and even loyalty.

Mothers should have the choice to work outside the home and they should also have the choice to stay home with their kids. It's that simple. The key word is choice.

You shouldn't have to be rich to stay at home with your own kids.

Cheers, canadianna

16 comments:

Greg Staples said...

Ditto! Nice post.

Bill said...

"Government should be in the business of making it easier for families to raise their own children, rather than making it convenient for them not to."

Perfectly stated. When will Canadians realize that all these "entitlements" cost us dearly. Not to mention the dangers of having the state raise our children? Full indoctrination from cradle to graduation. Scary.

The Real Bill said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
gullchasedship said...

I think you meant 10,000,0000,000, not 10,000,000 dollars.

Michael said...

Conservative women are so hot. Please post a pic in your profile Anna. :)

Canadi-anna said...

Yes, gullchasedship -- I should have just written the words out. I'm going to go and edit the post because it is 10 BILLION as you say. Thanks for that.

Canadi-anna said...

Michael, you're so sweet. If I posted a picture, you'd probably be disappointed. But you just made my day!

Shane said...

"The tax system unfairly favours two income families and conversely, one income families are unfairly penalized."

It actually doesn't even do that. It screws married people it its efforts to help the "single parent". Both incomes, or all incomes are fully taxed if the parents are married and living together. If they are separated or divorced, then tax breaks of something in the neighbourhood of 4000 dollars per child kick in.

It almost makes me want to get divorced in name only... if I was just my wife's roommate, our family would have another 12 grand tax free a year!

McGuire said...

here here!! I couldn't have said it better. This is an issue that could play very well for the Tories in the 905 belt if they play their cards right

Canadi-anna said...

It's a big issue to women. We all feel torn. We have to really pump this at election time.
This legislation will have residual effects for generations.

Anonymous said...

Canadi-anna wrote, "By giving us 'Universal' daycare, the state is telling us that only wage earners are 'productive' members of society -- mothers and fathers who choose to stay at home with their kids are 'unproductive.' They are implying that state run 'Early Learning Centres' are a substitute for the love of a mom or dad."

Here's an anti-daycare website that thinks otherwise...

Canadi-anna said...

Thanks for the link. The little quote on the bottom of the page says how a lot of moms feel.
Cheers.

bob said...

I would argue vehemently against any mandated government-run day care program. If anything, what you ought to be doing is pushing CPC to add a plank to revise the tax code so that married couples aren't penalized tax-wise. Hey, you might even get the gay marriage crowd on board with that one (not that you'd necessarily go along with the rest of their agenda, for sure).
I'd also endorse getting a picture on there, even though I understand reasons for not so doing (I won't put mine on there; I may put my dog's on, though).
Pax and Free Canada!!!

Anonymous said...

We had been blogging trying to find how our world sees the internet commerce business. Residual income has been a lifeline for us. Your site provides some of the best examples of this sort and we will bookmark yours. Another one we found was and appears to be related to yours is ##KEYWORD## site/blog. It pretty much covers ##KEYWORD## related stuff.

entrepreneur said...

Hey Canadi-anna, just looking info on work at home and stumbled onto your blog. Actually Caviar Socialism was not exactly what I was searching for, it caught my eye and grabbed my attention. I understand now how I landed on your site when I typed in work at home related info, and I'm glad I found your page. Nice post and I'll check back for more wisdom. : )

Anonymous said...

Hey there Canadi-anna, while trying to find a great work from home home based business opportunity, I found your page. Even though Caviar Socialism wasn't exactly what I was looking for, it sure grabbed my attention. I will check back frequently to see if you have posted anything new relating to work from home home based business opportunity.