Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021

[Altair]

If you're from an urban centre, apparently the answer is "only if other people have to pay for it."

What else should urban canadians need to pay directly for?

Schools?
Hospitals?
Police?
Road maintenance?
Firefighters?

What other public service should urban canadians need to break out the credit card for in order to receive a service, or is childcare where the line must be drawn?

I'm actually surprised to see those numbers for infants... I'm not saying there's not circumstances people are in, largely by choice, where you need to put your infant in full-day care, but it's kinda screwing my mind up. We have 2 year parental leave already. I'm not sure why someone would have a child and want to put them in full-time care two weeks later, to go back to work for $50-60k, when they can collect parental income to stay at home for the first year. I also can't see how that's a good way to raise a generation. But admittedly I don't have kids and being in the military has insulated me from what leads to these kind of decisions, but it's definitely raised my eyebrows.

Why would women want to get ahead in their careers? Why would women want to work? Why would families not want to have a duel income so they can afford the things they had before having kids?

Better question, if you have kids one day, why don't you stay home for 2 years? You're asking women(and its largely women) to do so, maybe as a society we should ask men to do that and watch the results.

Unless you prescribe to the philosophy that women belong at home raising kids and men must go out and earn a living.

 

[suffolkowner]

Seems strange to me to pay $24000 in daycare to go to work at a $24000 a year job

 

[Altair]

Seems strange to me to pay $24000 in daycare to go to work at a $24000 a year job

Taking taxes, transportation, and any other workplace expenses, the break even point is probably in the 40k range.

Make under that and its better to stay home.

There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.

 

[suffolkowner]

Taking taxes, transportation, and any other workplace expenses, the break even point is probably in the 40k range.

Make under that and its better to stay home.

There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.

$40,000 decent money what do the people who make less than that get out of this arrangement?

Like I said before put the little bastards to work solves the daycare problem plus society gets the benefit of greater childhood workplace participation. We wouldn't need foreign farm labourers anymore as 5 year olds can pick tomatoes

 

[Kirkhill]

Okay, lets do it.

I didn't have my child in Quebec. My spouse stayed at home to care for them. So....no.

Alberta also has a higher average income, collects more taxes per capita, has a younger population thus not needing to support as many elderly people, and has a lower overall tax burden. Alberta made the choice to not have a sales tax of which proceeds could go towards things like child care. Alberta crying poor is really rich. Even with the oil crash and job losses it still has among the highest average incomes in the nation.

Trans mountain will be done in a year I think? 2? KeystoneXL was done in by president of the USA? What do you want?

Again, despite everything, Alberta is still one of the most wealthy jurisdictions in Canada. Average salary 77k a year compared to the Canadian average of 58k.

This is getting further and further away from childcare I notice.

Further and further away.

I never got it and my kid is in school now so I never will.

Put in a sales tax and stop complaining.

As I said.

Your health.

 

[Jarnhamar]

There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.

Are women in Quebec better represented in traditionally male dominated work places now?

 

[Altair]

As I said.

Your health.

So I see you don't actually want to address anything that you wrote and everything I took the time to respond to.

Seen.

 

[Altair]

Are women in Quebec better represented in traditionally male dominated work places now?

Why does this matter?

Women will work where they want to work.

 

[Kirkhill]

So I see you don't actually want to address anything that you wrote and everything I took the time to respond to.

Seen.

I started by saying I didn't want a fight. I still don't. You had your say. I had my say. You responded. I'm satisfied. I doubt either one of us will change the other's view. But perhaps we might influence a third party.

Cheers.

 

[Altair]

$40,000 decent money what do the people who make less than that get out of this arrangement?

They probably stay home. Which leads to less workplace participation, less income tax, less economic activity.

Or they don't have kids. Which leads to a lower birthrate, more immigration, riskier pregnancies later in life, or infertility. And of course, probably more abortions as women feel that having a child would be prohibitively expensive and cost them their careers.

Like I said before put the little bastards to work solves the daycare problem plus society gets the benefit of greater childhood workplace participation. We wouldn't need foreign farm labourers anymore as 5 year olds can pick tomatoes

You sound very reasonable. You should start a political party with that as your main campaign promise.

 

[Altair]

I started by saying I didn't want a fight. I still don't. You had your say. I had my say. You responded. I'm satisfied. I doubt either one of us will change the other's view. But perhaps we might influence a third party.

Cheers.

Fair enough.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Why does this matter?

Women will work where they want to work.

I'm curious if instituting child care benefits allowed women to break the glass ceiling into male dominated realms or they just work in traditionally women dominated places more.

 

[suffolkowner]

They probably stay home. Which leads to less workplace participation, less income tax, less economic activity.

Or they don't have kids. Which leads to a lower birthrate, more immigration, riskier pregnancies later in life, or infertility. And of course, probably more abortions as women feel that having a child would be prohibitively expensive and cost them their careers.

You sound very reasonable. You should start a political party with that as your main campaign promise.

Well I didn't put the sarcasm emoji in or whatever BUT if greater labour participation is good for women why wouldn't it be for kids as well?

Does the childcare actually lead to a greater birthrate? I had been led to believe that while this was the goal of Quebec's plan that it hadn't been realized

You don't get elected with reasonable policies that's not what the process is about

 

[Altair]

Well I didn't put the sarcasm emoji in or whatever BUT if greater labour participation is good for women why wouldn't it be for kids as well?

I hope you are not comparing adult women who have children to children.

Does the childcare actually lead to a greater birthrate? I had been led to believe that while this was the goal of Quebec's plan that it hadn't been realized

Fertility rates and labour force participation among women in Quebec and Ontario

Using data from the Canadian Vital Statistics Birth Database and from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), this study examines the relationship between fertility rates and labour force participation among women aged 15 to 44 in Ontario and in Quebec between 1996 and 2016, two provinces that followed...

www150.statcan.gc.ca

• After four decades of similarity, fertility rates have been slightly higher in Quebec than in Ontario since 2005. In 2016, Quebec’s total fertility rate was 1.59 children per woman, while Ontario’s was 1.46.
• The difference was mostly driven by women in their twenties, who tend to have more children in Quebec than in Ontario. This is partly because the proportion of women in their twenties who are in a couple is higher in Quebec (39%, versus 28% in Ontario in 2016).
• As fertility rates increased in Quebec, the labour force participation of women aged 15 to 44 also increased, exceeding that of women in Ontario after 2003. In 2016, the participation rate of women was 81% in Quebec, compared with 75% in Ontario.
• Most of the relative increase in female labour force participation in Quebec occurred among women with young children. Between 1996 and 2016, the labour force participation rate of women whose youngest child was under the age of 3 increased by nearly 20 percentage points in Quebec, compared with a 4 percentage point increase in Ontario. The Quebec–Ontario difference was smaller among women without children under the age of 13.
• Changes in the composition of the population of women aged 15 to 44 and differences in real wage growth for this population do not explain the divergent trends observed in female labour force participation in Quebec and Ontario after 1996. At the same time, the costs associated with child care and housekeeping services grew less in Quebec than in Ontario over the period.

You don't get elected with reasonable policies that's not what the process is about

"Reasonable"

 

[Altair]

I'm curious if instituting child care benefits allowed women to break the glass ceiling into male dominated realms or they just work in traditionally women dominated places more.

As long as women who want to work are able to work, and it seems like this is the case in Quebec, then I really don't care where they work.

If you want to know, you are free to do the research, but seeing as I do not care I wont be doing it, and I do not know the answer to your question.

 

[suffolkowner]

I hope you are not comparing adult women who have children to children.

Fertility rates and labour force participation among women in Quebec and Ontario

Using data from the Canadian Vital Statistics Birth Database and from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), this study examines the relationship between fertility rates and labour force participation among women aged 15 to 44 in Ontario and in Quebec between 1996 and 2016, two provinces that followed...

www150.statcan.gc.ca

• After four decades of similarity, fertility rates have been slightly higher in Quebec than in Ontario since 2005. In 2016, Quebec’s total fertility rate was 1.59 children per woman, while Ontario’s was 1.46.
• The difference was mostly driven by women in their twenties, who tend to have more children in Quebec than in Ontario. This is partly because the proportion of women in their twenties who are in a couple is higher in Quebec (39%, versus 28% in Ontario in 2016).
• As fertility rates increased in Quebec, the labour force participation of women aged 15 to 44 also increased, exceeding that of women in Ontario after 2003. In 2016, the participation rate of women was 81% in Quebec, compared with 75% in Ontario.
• Most of the relative increase in female labour force participation in Quebec occurred among women with young children. Between 1996 and 2016, the labour force participation rate of women whose youngest child was under the age of 3 increased by nearly 20 percentage points in Quebec, compared with a 4 percentage point increase in Ontario. The Quebec–Ontario difference was smaller among women without children under the age of 13.
• Changes in the composition of the population of women aged 15 to 44 and differences in real wage growth for this population do not explain the divergent trends observed in female labour force participation in Quebec and Ontario after 1996. At the same time, the costs associated with child care and housekeeping services grew less in Quebec than in Ontario over the period.

"Reasonable"

adult women or men (let's not be sexist) to children sure they are or could be labour force participants

the numbers are interesting but 1.46 to 1.59 isn't much especially since there are multiple factors involved and still well below 2.1

obviously wage growth is going to be there and child care costs are lower because its subsidized that doesn't really explain anything

"reasonable"?

 

[dapaterson]

A nine percent increase across the population is significant.

 

[Fabius]

Is having both parents outsource caring for their offspring really something we want to encourage as a society?
Having both parents prioritize jobs and dollars with the state caring for the kids from 7am to 6pm is really the best choice a society will encourage?
Any family who disagrees and keeps a parent home will now pay more taxes to allow others to afford the same things they could before having kids? Sounds great.

 

[suffolkowner]

A nine percent increase across the population is significant.

Its interesting, maybe even significant is it statistically significant? What's the p value? It still falls way short of 2.1

 

[Altair]

adult women or men (let's not be sexixt) to children sure they are or could be labour force participants

Are you comparing the legal to the illegal?

the numbers are interesting but 1.46 to 1.59 isn't much especially since there are multiple factors involved and still well below 2.1

There were multiple factors involved before as well, but Quebec was in lockstep with Ontario none the less. Besides, question you asked was did childcare lead to increased birthrate, and the answer is yes.

obviously wage growth is going to be there and child care costs are lower because its subsidized that doesn't really explain anything

I think that wage growth, economic participation, increased economic activity, more independence for women, women having children earlier in life leading to less challenging pregnancies' later on in life, women not being forces to put their careers on pause are all really important developments.

"reasonable"?

Child labour being "reasonable"