Is it worth it mums going to work

[Guest Guest14361]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/lifestyle/parenting/childcare-affordability-report-some-mums-return-to-work-for-344-an-hour/story-fni0do1y-1226962488365

 

nobby

[Guest Guest12727]

That is the minimum wage that is being used for the calculations.

[Guest Guest14361]

Well if it was anymore like $40 a week, still don't think it's worth it, time you take out travelling expenses etc etc

 

nobby

[scooterdan]

If you want kids you be able to afford them on your own without others having to pay for them.......

[Lazy Cow]

Well if it was anymore like $40 a week, still don't think it's worth it, time you take out travelling expenses etc etc

 

nobby

 

I get your point, but isn't working about more than just the money?

 

We decided that I would stay at home with the kids, and I had a blast. However, I still had to work - the UK system wasn't as generous as our one - so nights, key jobs, paperwork etc.

 

When we got here, my first job left us around $90? better off financially, but made me feel better about myself, allowed me to meet more people (I was already volunteering), and set my kids a better example.

 

When you consider that there are now families with three generations that have never worked, I believe it is important to show that you will take responsibility for your self, and your family, by working.*

 

IMHO, of course.

 

LC

 

 

* i am in no way having a go at people who cannot work, btw.

[Guest Guest12727]

.....and the reason childcare is so expensive is that childcare workers want and deserve a decent wage. Working parents expect their children to be cared for by suitable people and have to pay for that.

 

I don't know if the article took into account the generous government rebates on childcare - as I didn't read to the end due to my dislike of this type of reporting. Really it is a non-story. I could say I work for $3 per hr by the time I pay my mortgage (actually I wish I had that much left!). We all make choices on where we spend our money.

[Toni]

..... I could say I work for $3 per hr by the time I pay my mortgage (actually I wish I had that much left!). We all make choices on where we spend our money.

 

Thanks Howde - I think what you have said nails it on the head for me. When I heard the story on the radio I got annoyed about it but couldn't quite put it into words. When I was looking after an elderly family member I had to make choices about how many hours I worked and what I spent money on and and things were tight. But you just have to do it. It isn't just about children is it? Not to say children aren't important, because they are, but there are a whole range of choices that people choose to spend money on and they are all valid.

[Guest davistev]

financially it is not good - emotionally, that's a different story.

[Guest BurgessFamily]

1. People should pay for their own kids, no handouts or benefits etc.

 

2. The country should not rely on future tax payers (current kids), taxing enough to put money away for the future instead.

 

3. All education should not be subsidised, but paid back in full once working - nothing is FREE, someone always pays for it somewhere.

 

As it stands, the country needs more kids to pay for our own future (for those with, and WITHOUT kids).

It's a pity governments generally only look to the next 3 or 4 years when planning.

[Guest Helchops]

1. People should pay for their own kids, no handouts or benefits etc.

 

2. The country should not rely on future tax payers (current kids), taxing enough to put money away for the future instead.

 

3. All education should not be subsidised, but paid back in full once working - nothing is FREE, someone always pays for it somewhere.

 

As it stands, the country needs more kids to pay for our own future (for those with, and WITHOUT kids).

It's a pity governments generally only look to the next 3 or 4 years when planning.

 

Good job you're not running the country then!

just to be clear are you essentially wishing kids get saddled with some sort of loan/repayment plan post-secondary education? If so that might be the most ridiculous thing I've heard on here . The whole idea of 'state' education was to raise intelligent, educated kids who can contribute to society by working and paying taxes. I would put it to you tat taxes are a type of levy on education anyway.

[RachaelOs]

When people say that if you can't afford children you shouldn't have them and no benefits, no handouts etc - what would you suggest changes?

full time maternity pay for a set period from all employers?

the government stop paying benefits and instead use the money to run nurseries so everyone can work and it be financially worthwhile?

Massive increase in minimum wage?

Couple who both work but only in low income jobs shouldn't be allowed to have children?

[Lazy Cow]

3. All education should not be subsidised, but paid back in full once working - nothing is FREE, someone always pays for it somewhere.

.

 

Am I being naive, because I thought that we, the taxpayers, already pay for education.

 

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure I was a kid once (albeit a while a go), so am arguably already doing as BurgessFamily suggested.

 

LC

[GarethB]

As usual a story with little facts to grab the headlines. My youngest goes into childcare 3 days a week. Centre charges $70 per day, after CCB we pay approx $36 per day, then at the end of each quarter we get half our out of pocket expenses back again, ie $18, making the total cost only $18 for the day!! Even if my partner was on min wage on her 15 hour per week job that's little over an hours wage, so even working just a 5 hour day is still worth it! Also bearing in mind if you earn less than$20K (which on a 15 hour PPT role she will) per year you pay zero tax. The system here is very generous even by western standards, stay positive!

[Guest BurgessFamily]

I was just presenting valid points, from the direction of 'raising your own kids' and 'not relying on handouts'. They are not necessarily my own views.

 

Personally, I'm all for supporting young families and education should be free (if there is such a thing). Those that are lucky enough to find success should be willing to put their hand in their pockets.

[Keith & Linda]

I have great difficulty in trying to understand what on earth money has to do with having/not having children! surely children are born from love and not a pay packet or handout. Having children were part of our dream and desires when we fell in love, and money and or entitlements did not even enter the equation, probably because we did not have any/many then. My wife did not work until the children were at school (she did two nights a week waitress work once the youngest was about 3). We did not whinge and whine, we scrimped and survived, we budgeted ( well, really had to) our money to the last 10p and yes, I really mean the last 10p.

If having children came down to affordability then there would be a good chance that not a lot of people would be about today to be talking about it on this forum.

ALL WE NEED IS LOVE!

[Keith & Linda]

I was just presenting valid points, from the direction of 'raising your own kids' and 'not relying on handouts'. They are not necessarily my own views.

 

Personally, I'm all for supporting young families and education should be free (if there is such a thing). Those that are lucky enough to find success should be willing to put their hand in their pockets.

 

How do we measure/define success BurgessFamily?

[jim and adel]

... People should pay for their own kids, no handouts or benefits etc.

 

... the country needs more kids to pay for our own future (for those with, and WITHOUT kids).

 

So, on the one hand there shouldn't be any benefits or handouts but a few lines later kids should pay for other people's future, including those who don't have kids. Yeah, right.

 

I was just presenting valid points, from the direction of 'raising your own kids' and 'not relying on handouts'. They are not necessarily my own views.

 

This gets more bizarre with every posting!

[Guest BurgessFamily]

Ouch. Sorry... I guess I'm just trolling in a way.

 

Kind of like dropping fish food in the tank and watching all the fish go into a frenzy.

[erobertson]

At the risk of wishing I never got involved in this, isn't there more to Government assistance with child care than just paying for other peoples children? Surely it's as much about allowing mums to go back to work and contribute to the economy? So childcare workers are getting a fair wage, while mums are also able to do their bit in the workforce if they choose to?

 

I would think that if the assistance was removed most mums would be forced to give up work and then what state would the workforce be in?

 

It's a little narrow minded to think it's just about propping up people who choose to have kids.