Soaring Childcare Costs And Crippling Tax Cuts Force Women To Stay At Home

[interestrateripoff]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-2042571/Soaring-childcare-costs-crippling-tax-cuts-force-women-stay-home.html

Every week, 600 hard-pressed working mothers are being forced to give up their jobs.

When rocketing childcare costs are added to soaring household bills and vanishing tax breaks, many just can’t afford to keep working and throw in the towel.

Ruth Lythe investigates the financial reasons behind the rise of the stay-at-home mum.

What's happening?

Every day, dozens of middle-class mothers decide they cannot afford to return to work after having a baby.

According to insurer Aviva, 32,000 have quit the workplace in the past year.

......

The cost of childminders for the under twos is also on the rise — increasing by an average 8 per cent to £90 in England over the past year.

A spokesman for the National Childminding Association says: ‘Because there is no significant state subsidy for childcare, parents end up spending more of their income on childcare than those in most of Europe who receive more generous support.’

Or because the state is subsidising child care this has pushed up the price making childcare economically unaffordable.

Still if we just create some more benefits this can all be fixed.

Although is there really a job for these people to go back too?

Yet another whiny Wail piece seeming to want more benefits for the middle class.

[Timak]

Or because the state is subsidising child care this has pushed up the price making childcare economically unaffordable.

Not sure I agree with that.

The ratio of carers to babies less than a year old is 1:3.

The minimum wage costs an employer about £7 an hour - a 9 hour day therefore costs around £63.00

Childcare costs about £50 a day, so 3 babies provide an income to a nursery of £150 per member of staff per day.

From the remaining £87.00 profit per employee they have to provide a facility,equipment, insurance,holiday cover etc all before they can draw a wage.

Believe me there isn't a great deal of money in running a nursery.

Independent childminders can do alright - about £4-5 per hour per child but again the limit of 3 children applies.

[the gardener]

Not sure I agree with that.

The ratio of carers to babies less than a year old is 1:3.

The minimum wage costs an employer about £7 an hour - a 9 hour day therefore costs around £63.00

Childcare costs about £50 a day, so 3 babies provide an income to a nursery of £150 per member of staff per day.

From the remaining £87.00 profit per employee they have to provide a facility,equipment, insurance,holiday cover etc all before they can draw a wage.

Believe me there isn't a great deal of money in running a nursery.

Independent childminders can do alright - about £4-5 per hour per child but again the limit of 3 children applies.

That might be true of London/Surrey but in our area the going rate is £3.5 per hour.

[interestrateripoff]

Childcare Costs Put Parents In Debt, Survey Concludes

Thread from earlier in the month.

[Pole]

That might be true of London/Surrey but in our area the going rate is £3.5 per hour.

Average monthly cost of nursery in Poland:

£40 (yes!).

That covers a 5 days a week stay, 9 hours per day, pre-formal education lessons and full meals during the day: breakfast, snacks and cooked lunch...

I still don't know how they do it, but I think the Polish government is subsidising nurseries big time. And it works, i.e. normal, working families have babies. I think heavy subsidies for nurseries are better than the UK approach, i.e. massive benefits for fake single mums and other disfunctional so-called families, etc.

At the moment in the UK, if a couple earns average wages, one of them must stop working unless they want to pay almost 40% of their net income on the nursery alone.

No wonder the middle class is shrinking, and the underclass is growing.

[winkie]

This is where close kit communities, family and close friends come into their own.....

[TheCountOfNowhere]

You know when a countries child carers are getting paid more than their rocket scientists you have a problem.

[frenchy]

You know when a countries child carers are getting paid more than their rocket scientists you have a problem.

don't know about child carers, but that is already the case with hairdressers and builders...

[Redcellar]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-2042571/Soaring-childcare-costs-crippling-tax-cuts-force-women-stay-home.html

Or because the state is subsidising child care this has pushed up the price making childcare economically unaffordable.

Still if we just create some more benefits this can all be fixed.

Although is there really a job for these people to go back too?

Yet another whiny Wail piece seeming to want more benefits for the middle class.

Cannot afford to, or chose not to? I suspect the latter.

It's a mindset that if I don't earn enough then I won't bother. I would guess that they are taking home between £20 - 50 after the costs so they decide it's better to not bother. We bash the long term unemployed because of the same thinking.

[winkie]

What really gets up my nose is.....a person you know well, know everything about them enough to trust them with one of the most precious things in your life...the authorities want them to have a CRB check ....but the highly qualified heads of social services on mega salaries can let children on their watch be abused.

[mightytharg]

I love the Daily Mail as much as anyone, but "Crippling Tax Cuts"?

Really?

Shouldn't crippling people be a criminal offence, and not something we merely discourage through the tax system like drinking or smoking?

Or do they mean something else? Tax Rises?

[LivingWithTheInlaws]

It seems to really depend on the hours and what sort of job you do. My wife has found a job very close to home, with part time hours that fit into the school day and that only slightly exceed the free childcare allowance for preschoolers. If she were to take on more hours, the cost of childcare around the core school hours would make it unaffordable.

On a slight tangent, our nursery school really struggles to survive on the rates that the government pay for the free childcare hours. It's designed to work well for larger nurseries with catering facilities that can make money on lunches and things. Doesn't work well for smaller village nurseries working out of village halls.

[snowflux]

Average monthly cost of nursery in Poland:

£40 (yes!).

That covers a 5 days a week stay, 9 hours per day, pre-formal education lessons and full meals during the day: breakfast, snacks and cooked lunch...

I still don't know how they do it, but I think the Polish government is subsidising nurseries big time. And it works, i.e. normal, working families have babies. I think heavy subsidies for nurseries are better than the UK approach, i.e. massive benefits for fake single mums and other disfunctional so-called families, etc.

At the moment in the UK, if a couple earns average wages, one of them must stop working unless they want to pay almost 40% of their net income on the nursery alone.

No wonder the middle class is shrinking, and the underclass is growing.

I'm sure child care is a lot cheaper in Poland, but you can't compare the cost of looking after babies with that of nursery school. One carer can look after far more 4-year-old children than 0 or 1-year-old children.

Edit: BTW, I used to pay a (heavily state-subsidised) EUR 28 per month for my lad to go to kindergarten in Germany when he was 3 years old.

Edited September 28, 2011 by snowflux

[ader]

There should be no subsidised places. Kids should be raised by parents not strangers. That would have prevented the stupid hpi.

[winkie]

There should be no subsidised places. Kids should be raised by parents not strangers. That would have prevented the stupid hpi.

Raised by parents yes....but what about single/lone parents when one parent is not responsible enough or able to help with the raising....what about careers that are not strangers?

[aa3]

Or the value these women are adding to the economy by their 'labour' is so low that it is not worth them going to work.

In the workforce women's real strength is in managing information. However with the advent of the information age, computers are doing more and more of that.

If you look at the remaining real jobs, ironically for being in an information age.. most involve braun. Like plumbers, carpenters, tilers, roofers, brick layers, electricians, etc.

[SarahBell]

Raised by parents yes....but what about single/lone parents when one parent is not responsible enough or able to help with the raising....what about careers that are not strangers?

Stay at home says the job centre to a mum of 4 that I know. She is a single parent because her ex beat her within an inch of her life and did time for it.

She wants to work again but they just tell her it's not worth her bothering.

[okaycuckoo]

Raised by parents yes....but what about single/lone parents when one parent is not responsible enough or able to help with the raising....what about careers that are not strangers?

Single parents don't really need to work - there are a dozen benefits available to them. Different story if they have mortgages.

[Game_Over]

I really like the concept of trusting your most precious possession to the person prepared to 'look after' them for the least amount of money.

[LJAR]

I really like the concept of trusting your most precious possession to the person prepared to 'look after' them for the least amount of money.

well its a question of what you can afford, and how much you value what the extra cost buys you.

Ultimately the problem is the limit of 3 children per minder, we dont restrict housewives to only having 3 children do we?

Let people be adults and decide how their children should be looked after and who by.

[aa3]

Stay at home says the job centre to a mum of 4 that I know. She is a single parent because her ex beat her within an inch of her life and did time for it.

She wants to work again but they just tell her it's not worth her bothering.

As a taxpayer I would rather pay for her to stay home and raise those 4 kids. Than be another body out there trying to compete to make money, in an economy that already has way too many people trying to compete for work.

Maybe in a different time, like in world war 2 where we desperately needed women working in munitions factories, I would say we need her labour. But right now we do not remotely need her labour.

[SarahBell]

As a taxpayer I would rather pay for her to stay home and raise those 4 kids. Than be another body out there trying to compete to make money, in an economy that already has way too many people trying to compete for work.

Maybe in a different time, like in world war 2 where we desperately needed women working in munitions factories, I would say we need her labour. But right now we do not remotely need her labour.

She feels ashamed claiming benefits though.

Rare to hear of I know.

[winkie]

Stay at home says the job centre to a mum of 4 that I know. She is a single parent because her ex beat her within an inch of her life and did time for it.

She wants to work again but they just tell her it's not worth her bothering.

It is not worth her bothering.....so why do some give her a hard time, as if it were her fault for trying to do her best.

Single parents don't really need to work - there are a dozen benefits available to them. Different story if they have mortgages.

They may not need to work...but it would nice if they had a choice .... why would having a mortgage make a difference?

I really like the concept of trusting your most precious possession to the person prepared to 'look after' them for the least amount of money.

Don't know what you are talking about....there are thousands of parents that send their bundles of joy to boarding schools for long periods at a time....they don't say good night to them for weeks on end.

As a taxpayer I would rather pay for her to stay home and raise those 4 kids. Than be another body out there trying to compete to make money, in an economy that already has way too many people trying to compete for work.

Maybe in a different time, like in world war 2 where we desperately needed women working in munitions factories, I would say we need her labour. But right now we do not remotely need her labour.

What is the difference between mens labour and womans labour....men can care the same as women can care......sometimes a full time office job is a doddle compared to a full time childminding job.

[sundance_kid]

As a taxpayer I would rather pay for her to stay home and raise those 4 kids. Than be another body out there trying to compete to make money, in an economy that already has way too many people trying to compete for work.

Maybe in a different time, like in world war 2 where we desperately needed women working in munitions factories, I would say we need her labour. But right now we do not remotely need her labour.

Exactly, I see this as nothing but good news.

Now the easy money days are gone we're just beginning revert back to type. One person looking after the home, the other being the breadwinner.

Women we're only encouraged to go into the workplace en mass to increase the labour pool/competition and increase the consumer pool which also had the affect of raising the cost of living for all, single and married.

Edited September 28, 2011 by sundance_kid

[winkie]

Exactly, I see this as nothing but good news.

Now the easy money days are gone we're just beginning revert back to type. One person looking after the home, the other being the breadwinner.

Women we're only encouraged to go into the workplace en mass to increase the labour pool/competition and increase the consumer pool which also had the affect of raising the cost of living for all, single and married.

I agree, when there are two responsible parents, splitting the child care duties between them (however way you want to split it) is the best way to bring up stable, contented, secure kids.....two full time pay slips with parents that are never there is not always the best for young children or future prosperity....