[Ronradio]

"Have we become a nation of hand-out dependant suckups? "

That's what I was asking, but took me two paragraphs where as you put it much more succinctly.

[Arctic_Menace]

RUEZ RUEZ:

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:

First of all, it's too little for daycare, and secondly, there are quite a few parents who would take that moeny and spend it partying, drinking, doing drugs, or spending it on that new TV you always wanted.

If you can't trust the parents to do right for thier children then thier children should be taken away. Why coddle people all the time?

Point taken... Sorry about missing this post man.

[Scape]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

The last thing I want out of ANY government is another nationally run/funded program. Whatever they claim it will cost will end up being overrun by upwards of 1000%.

Compare that to the young families (20-30's) who are raising kids now that have to cancel a future that would have generated much more than the day care program could even hope to cost and the choice is easy. Raising children should not be condoned and by having kids in this nation you must choose between a high paying job or a family, my point is they can have both if we give them some help but we need something more than Mcdonalds to do the job and not everyone has family to pitch in.

[Arctic_Menace]

onemeancanadian onemeancanadian:

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:

Frankly, I'd prefer having a national daycare plan knowing that my kids would receive government supported care, instead of Harper's $1200 a year deal that goes to the parents. First of all, it's too little for daycare, and secondly, there are quite a few parents who would take that moeny and spend it partying, drinking, doing drugs, or spending it on that new TV you always wanted.

Sure you would you're a socialist. You also think Castro is doing a good job.

$1:

knowing that my kids would receive government supported care

You are a KID, how sad is that?

Brainwash em young Brainwash em often

1) Yeah, okay, so maybe I've got alot of socialist views. But I'm not stupid. Canada needs Capitalism, especially for the economy and for businesses.

onemeancanadian onemeancanadian:

You also think Castro is doing a good job.

Please tell me when I've ever said that. And how would you know in the first place? The thing about you people is that you automatically assume something, even though it may be false. You also failed to counter my argument. You just responded quite boorishly without gathering any evidence that says that I support Castro.

onemeancanadian onemeancanadian:

You are a KID, how sad is that?

Brainwash em young Brainwash em often.

Yeah, I'm a kid. But I wanna have kids in the future. And so because I have an opinion that differs from yours, I'm brainwashed, is that it?


Yeah...I'm a 17 year old socialist. I question authority, I smoke marijuana, I form my own opinions that differ from those of many people, and I've done alot of stupid stuff in my life so far.


But it looks to me like this "brainwashed" socialist kid is alot more mature than you.............

[ThePolitician]

I am a family man who is in his twenties and my wife is a stay at home mom. We chose to have children and we chose to have the children's mother raise them as opposed to a stranger that probably has different values than us.

Do I believe that the government should institute a nationally funded day care program that is wide open like the Liberal's plan - NO.

That is just another example of Liberal waste. They budget 11 billion dollars to daycare and would probably start with building a new 150 million dollar office in Ottawa to house the administration offices and then hire about 2000 more cronies to work in the department. Then they would go out into the provinces and put in their local federal administration offices along with their local staff, inspectors, data entry etc.

By the time they went to create actual daycare spaces in the means of new facilities and day care workers they'd have about enough money left for a couple o' happy meals from the local McDonalds.

This is just another Liberal BIG GOVERNMENT proposal. Administer the livin hell out of something so that there's nothin left in there for any one else.

Do I think that the CPC's $100/month proposal is a good idea? Well it certainly is alot better than what the Liberal's have to offer. The CPC allows the primary care giver to do their duty in providing the most necessary items to the child whatever that happens to be at the time. There is no discrimination against a single income family that does not need a government provided day care space.

A better idea would be to go back to when I believe there was more than a single "equivalant to spouse" deduction allowed as a deduction off of income task. In a single income household, with relation to income tax deductions, it does not matter if you're married or common-law with no children or if you have 15+ kids as you only get ONE "equivalant to spouse" deduction amount of about 8.5K a year. With a wife and two kids, that means a deduction of about $2800 per person. Not much to go on for a year eh?

For those of you who don't want ANY form of child subsidies I say two things:

#1 - In order to grow Canada from the inside as well as through immigration we have to continue to support our children and our families so that we can be proud of the new generation that we usher in.

#2 - I could go for a zero subsidy for child care as it does cost even those who have no children what so ever - BUT then we must reduce personal income taxes across the board in a proportionate amount as that money is no longer being distributed out. It's the "Stand up for yourself" mentality. Which I am very in favor of, but if it applies to childcare it MUST ALSO APPLY TO WELFARE, EI, HEALTHCARE, etc.

Those are my thoughts, not yours.

[Banff]

lily lily:

$1:

Do I think that the CPC's $100/month proposal is a good idea? Well it certainly is alot better than what the Liberal's have to offer. The CPC allows the primary care giver to do their duty in providing the most necessary items to the child whatever that happens to be at the time. There is no discrimination against a single income family that does not need a government provided day care space.

So you think the taxpayers owe you a cheque because you have kids??

I'm not sure I understand his point either .

[ShepherdsDog]

lily lily:

$1:

Do I think that the CPC's $100/month proposal is a good idea? Well it certainly is alot better than what the Liberal's have to offer. The CPC allows the primary care giver to do their duty in providing the most necessary items to the child whatever that happens to be at the time. There is no discrimination against a single income family that does not need a government provided day care space.

So you think the taxpayers owe you a cheque because you have kids??[/quote]

How is that any different than a federally funded national daycare program?? Either way money is being taken out of taxpayer's pockets. Did you ever collect family allowance cheques or payments made under the Child Tax benefit program?

[Tman1]

Sorry, I just jumped in here but if the government paid families to 'procreate', then maybe the birth rate in this country would rise instead of lower....incentives go a long way. I mean, don't you want more money? Before you slam me, I know popping out kids is no easy task but just a thought.

[lyonhart]

That is one way to look at sex for money

[Banff]

I'm curious to know what portion of the persons posting here is tax related especially the poster ?

[Delwin]

I'm with you TMAN, I don't have any kids but I think for a lot of single mothers, their role in society is to raise a well rounded, tax-paying member of society. We are on the doorstep of a inverted population pyramid and the only way to fix this is through immigration or raising the birth rate. If we raise the birth rate we are going to have children with no language barriers and a stronger sense of Canadian Values, This obviously should not be the goal of a daycare incentive, but encouraging children through "baby bonuses" does not seem like a bad idea to me. It worked well in the 80's when implemented by quebec:
Quebec's Allowance for Newborn Children (ANC), implemented with considerable success in the late 1980s, might serve as a model: The program provided (approximately) $500 for a first child, $1,000 for a second, and, for a third and all subsequent children, 20 quarterly payments of $400. According to one estimate, from Kevin Milligan of the University of British Columbia, this led to a 15 percent bump in the province's birthrate, and the overall "cost" to the government of each additional child--i.e., each child who would not have been born in the absence of the ANC--was just over $15,000. That number sounds high, but it pales in comparison with the financial sacrifices that the parents will make to raise the child--the opportunity costs, in forgone wages, can top $1 million for a family of modest means--and the value of the taxes that child will pay over a lifetime. . . .
We are going to have to start thinking about how it is that we are going to support the aging population in the future.

[Tman1]

I can't speak for families here but known cases in other cultures would attest to this. Gypsies in Europe are the Aboriginals of North America, scorned, prejudiced against. They have a reason, to keep their culture alive but most importantly to an impoverished people.. the means for survival. They have kids by the dozen, they get cheques from the government. This could be the only reason for income but it does raise their population.

Canada relies mostly on immigrants to swell this country's population because people are having less and less children. I am by no means supporting this or denying this position but merely saying that if the government did implement cheques to would be mothers, this country would not have to rely on so many immigrants to increase the population.

[ThePolitician]

As I had said in my post; NO I do not think the people of Canada OWE me a cheque because I have kids.

The two things I noted were, #1 If you're going to have "child assistance" money, let the indivduals decide where it's best put, or #2 If there is no gov't subsidies then cut back the tax rates to reflect what they are currently taking off of everyone to pay to those with kids.

I can stand on my own two feet and DO NOT need hand outs. I want a responsible government that doesn't believe that over taxation and excessive social programs are the answer.

Sorry if that wasn't clear the first time around.

[Banff]

Tman1 Tman1:

I can't speak for families here but known cases in other cultures would attest to this. Gypsies in Europe are the Aboriginals of North America, scorned, prejudiced against. They have a reason, to keep their culture alive but most importantly to an impoverished people.. the means for survival. They have kids by the dozen, they get cheques from the government. This could be the only reason for income but it does raise their population.

Canada relies mostly on immigrants to swell this country's population because people are having less and less children. I am by no means supporting this or denying this position but merely saying that if the government did implement cheques to would be mothers, this country would not have to rely on so many immigrants to increase the population.

some good veiws going on here
.....inotherwards , get busy or else ! This has been an advertisement made without the use of canadian tax dollars by the TMAN party of Canada .

[Tman1]

LOL, thanks.