home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: misc.kids
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!stgprao
- From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
- Subject: Re: Is There A Mommy Track for Technical Professionals?
- Message-ID: <1993Jan22.174917.15377@unocal.com>
- Sender: news@unocal.com (Unocal USENET News)
- Organization: Unocal Corporation
- References: <1993Jan19.061356.14467@fuug.fi> <1993Jan21.212733.28090@litwin.com> <30321@optima.cs.arizona.edu>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:49:17 GMT
- Lines: 17
-
- It is a difficult situation, but I have a couple questions/comments.
-
- One would expect this to be a zero-sum situation (or less). If someone has to earn a living
- (less taxes) to pay for child care (plus overhead). By the time taxes and overhead are
- factored in, then the parent will have to be earning substantially more than the child care
- provider to come out ahead. (Read my lips: exploitation.) This analysis does not account for
- economy-of-scale which if one child care worker cares for ten children (the regulatory limit?)
- then costs are reduced.
-
- Also, I am suspicious of bragging wars- "my child care costs are lower than yours". The overhead
- of a regulated childcare place, just including social security tax and liability insurance is
- not insignificant. But we all know of the Zoe Biares of the child care industry that find
- el-cheapo situations, but whine when something goes wrong- either financially or to the child.
-
- The situation is difficult. Both parents need to work for money and/or to make life meaningful
- and fullfilling. The double-overhead situation described above should be reduced by a childcare
- reduction on the income tax.
-