# Childcare costs more than mortgages...



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

So now Childcare apparently costs more than a mortgage according to the Beebs here 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26373725

Indeed bloody rip off.  I am sure the providers are not making much money out of it, but it the childcare situation down south is ridiculous.  A full time nursery around us will easily cost 1200 a month - Yup that is close to 15K a year.  I love the ministerial spin on this.. 

_Education and Childcare Minister Elizabeth Truss said the survey showed that costs in England had fallen for the first time in 12 years in line with her department's Early Years Parent Survey from earlier this year. The drop in England was about Â£15 over the past year. "After 12 years of consistently rising prices, costs in England have stabilised for the first time - In fact once inflation is taken into account costs for the majority have actually fallen. This means more parents are able to access *affordable* childcare and support their families._... I would love to understand her definition of 'affordable'.

Little wonder Moms cant go back to work or membership at golf courses are down!!!

PS: Dont even get me started on term holiday rip offs..


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

My wife would need to be on Â£25k a year to break even, thats to put one of ours into full time care. let alone the other one thats due in 2 months!

We are looking at a "consortium" of 3 parents to have a private nanny to look after 3 kids, works out much much cheaper and a better standard of care and attention.

Anyone says nurseries are not profit making are talking rubbish or running a bad one. Newbury racecourse has one as part of its business and i have been told it is more profitable than the actual race course...


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			We are looking at a "consortium" of 3 parents to have a private nanny to look after 3 kids, works out much much cheaper and a better standard of care and attention.
		
Click to expand...

Yup, we got a few friends in a consortium and it worked well... until the nanny fell pregnant and they had to replace her.  Now they have to pay the new nanny as well as pay sick/mat pay to the old one!!





Rooter said:



			Newbury racecourse has one as part of its business and i have been told it is more profitable than the actual race course...
		
Click to expand...

I thought babies racing on top of camel/horses only happened in the middle east.. But then, I dont know much about 'op north'


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

vkurup said:



			But then, I dont know much about 'op north'
		
Click to expand...

How much 'North' of you (presumably near Hoebridge) do you think Newbury is?


----------



## anotherdouble (Mar 4, 2014)

This is not new news. I had a pupil 3 years ago who had just got a job in a pre school nursery and I enquired as to the cost. She replied it is 280 for 5 days.  That was from 8 til 5 and you had to pay extra for the 5 to 6.30 slot. All food is in thT figure. What is the point of working. Beggars belief.


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How much 'North' of you (presumably near Hoebridge) do you think Newbury is?
		
Click to expand...

On the other side of M4.... way too far :ears:


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

vkurup said:



			On the *other side of M4*.... way too far :ears:
		
Click to expand...

You most definitely need a geography lesson!:rofl:


----------



## Andy (Mar 4, 2014)

Simples, don't dip the pen in the inkwell ;-)


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You most definitely need a geography lesson!:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Opps.. M3 I mean..   either way it is the wrong side of Windsor I think.. hope.. maybe


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

vkurup said:



			Opps.. M3 I mean..   either way it is the wrong side of Windsor I think.. hope.. maybe
		
Click to expand...

LOL south of the M4, north of the M3. About level with Windsor.... Just 30 miles west


----------



## Maninblack4612 (Mar 4, 2014)

Children need to be brought up by their parents. When our kids were small my wife stayed at home & looked after them. It was, financially, a struggle but we, she in particular, wouldn't have wanted it any other way. Leaving your children in the care of others is, in many people's opinion, the cause of many of the problems with children & young adults today. Let the dissenters commence posting!


----------



## Maninblack4612 (Mar 4, 2014)

Andy said:



			Simples, don't dip the pen in the inkwell ;-)
		
Click to expand...

Or, if you do, make sure you leave the cap on!


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

Andy said:



			Simples, don't dip the pen in the inkwell ;-)
		
Click to expand...




Maninblack4612 said:



			Or, if you do, make sure you leave the cap on!
		
Click to expand...

What if the cap fell off and ink went everywhere?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

vkurup said:



			Opps.. M3 I mean..   either way it is the wrong side of Windsor I think.. hope.. maybe
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

So it's now official the North/South divide boundary is the M3.
Funny I thought it ended/started just north of Southampton.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

Maninblack4612 said:



			Children need to be brought up by their parents. When our kids were small my wife stayed at home & looked after them. It was, financially, a struggle but we, she in particular, wouldn't have wanted it any other way. *Leaving your children in the care of other is, in many people's opinion, the cause of many of the problems with children & young adults today*. Let the dissenters commence posting!
		
Click to expand...

Like Schools! Or Kindergartens!

Others think there are benefits in Child-Care and disadvantages with stay-at-home Mums (or Dads!).

It's probably not being breast-fed long enough, or is it breast-feeding too long? Or too much Sugar? Not enough Vegetables/Salads/Fruit? All just scare-mongering imo. A balanced family is in the best position to produce balanced kids/young adults; an unbalanced one is in the worst position... My view is 'do what ever you feel is best, but bear in mind the 'costs' and mitigate them'!


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So it's now official the North/South divide boundary is the M3.
Funny I thought it ended/started just north of Southampton.
		
Click to expand...

The M4 is the official line bordering north/south, we all know that! except london which is south and encased in the M25.. 

Oxford? North
MK? North
Cheltenham? North


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			LOL south of the M4, north of the M3. *About level with Windsor... Just 30 miles west* 

Click to expand...

And a little South! :rofl:


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And a little South! :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

I learnt something new today.. had to look up google maps.. Rooters gone up in my social books..


----------



## chrisd (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So it's now official the North/South divide boundary is the M3.
Funny I thought it ended/started just north of Southampton.
		
Click to expand...

When did it change from t'other side of Maidstone??


----------



## Hacker Khan (Mar 4, 2014)

Maninblack4612 said:



			Children need to be brought up by their parents. When our kids were small my wife stayed at home & looked after them. It was, financially, a struggle but we, she in particular, wouldn't have wanted it any other way. Leaving your children in the care of others is, in many people's opinion, the cause of many of the problems with children & young adults today. Let the dissenters commence posting!
		
Click to expand...

You are right, in fact we should make it law that all women (and lets be clear here, it will be the women in the vast majority of cases) should forget any ideas of having a career and stay at home to bring up the kids.  

Tune in next week when we ask the question, _'Women, should they really have the vote?_'


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 4, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			You are right, in fact we should make it law that all women (and lets be clear here, it will be the women in the vast majority of cases) should forget any ideas of having a career and stay at home to bring up the kids.  

Tune in next week when we ask the question, _'Women, should they really have the vote?_'
		
Click to expand...

No, it really is very simple - do not whine about the cost of child care, it's irritating.  Your decision to have a child then deal with the consequences.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 4, 2014)

One of you is in employment that minimises dependency on childcare?  Why is this so unacceptable.  When mine were very little and we had no grandparents locally to help out on a regular basis - my wife did not work until my youngest could go to nursery - then she took a low paid part time nursing bank job in our local hospital that was way beneath her level of training and experience.  As a result we did not have to depend upon expensive childcare and she could be flexible around school holidays -  we were skint without her pre-kids pretty good wage - but we weren't forking out on expensive childcare 5 days a week and she just did not work during school holidays.  Holidays? - very limited indeed.  Luxuries? - we just did without.  Golf? - not until my youngest was 8 yrs old and eldest 11. 

These days this doesn't seem to be an option for many.  I am not sure why.  Maybe society has become just too 'entitled' rather than 'make do'


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			One of you is in employment that minimises dependency on childcare?  Why is this so unacceptable.  When mine were very little and we had no grandparents locally to help out on a regular basis - my wife did not work until my youngest could go to nursery - then she took a low paid part time nursing bank job in our local hospital that was way beneath her level of training and experience.  As a result we did not have to depend upon expensive childcare and she could be flexible around school holidays -  we were skint without her pre-kids pretty good wage - but we weren't forking out on expensive childcare 5 days a week and she just did not work during school holidays.  Holidays? - very limited indeed.  These days this doesn't seem to be an option for many.  *I am not sure why*.
		
Click to expand...

Aspiration, 'we must have the biggest and best of everything', rather than cutting your cloth accordingly.


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Aspiration, 'we must have the biggest and best of everything', rather than cutting your cloth accordingly.
		
Click to expand...

Partially true.. My mom was a homemaker too and she brought us up alright (I think).  times have changed/are changing.  Women have career aspirations and they need the support.  Also cost of living has gone up, and you need all the money that you can find.  Increasingly Dad jobs are also not certain, so a lot of mums doing more than just supplement the income.  In case of single moms, the cost of childcare would force them into benefits rather than work. 

Ironically, as i write this, my mrs has decided to go part time, so she can spend more time with nipper. Tough decision for her as she does not know if her career will bounce back to her pre-kid days.  But then women are far stronger about these things then men <there I said it>


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

chrisd said:



			When did it change from t'other side of Maidstone??
		
Click to expand...

I meant the M3 not the N/S divide.
Agree M4 is the true boundary.
Expect protests from Devon and Cornwall any time soon.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 4, 2014)

Childcare is expensive, no point in moaning as thats the cost, pay it or make alternative arrangements.

Is it too expensive? what cost on ensuring the most precious thing in your life is looked after safely and securely?


You can't keep the same lifestyle when you have a child or children. Same cars, holidays, luxury goods etc if you can then good for you, but the majority of us can't, we'd like to and if I'm honest we try to, but the costs don't get less as they grow:mmm:

must dash- off to my second job to afford this years subs, then ebay tonight to pay for house and car insurance


----------



## Rumpokid (Mar 4, 2014)

With more and more schools doing the breakfast clubs(ha,ha)..After school activities like detention,surely childcare is only an option for pre-school...Helmet is on...


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			No, it really is very simple - do not whine about the cost of child care, it's irritating.  Your decision to have a child then deal with the consequences.
		
Click to expand...

Amen to that ! And also don't whinge about losing child support if you earn over Â£50k


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Amen to that ! And also don't whinge about losing child support if you earn over Â£50k
		
Click to expand...

But I can whinge about those separated/divorced couples who's children get bursaries and/or grants for university courses on the grounds of the mother's income.  When dad-departed is in fact showering largesse on the family through some clever-dick accountancy scheme/scam (and the same went for Education Maintenance Allowance - now scrapped)

And likes of me and Mrs have to scrape together the money to put ours through uni with absolutely NO help from the state or unis - on the grounds of our income being 'just' over any threshold - conveniently ignoring that living in a very expensive part of the country our disposable income is well clobbered by the costs-of-living/housing.  

And don't start me on unis giving bursaries to attract students with good A-levels - when a lot of these kids have got them through going to private school and whose parent are loaded.  Resentments? moi ? Oui - I have a few


----------



## guest100718 (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Amen to that ! And also don't whinge about losing child support if you earn over Â£50k
		
Click to expand...

I dunno, if you were used to getting it for years and then had it taken away. seems a bit unfair


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Amen to that ! And also don't whinge about losing child support if you earn over Â£50k
		
Click to expand...

you need to look at the bigger picture, lets use the below as an example.

I earn Â£51k a year. My wife stays home to look after the kids.
my neighbors both work and both earn Â£49.5k EACH.

They get child benefit, i dont.

Just making a point, its not as black and white as the daily mail may have you believe.


----------



## guest100718 (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			you need to look at the bigger picture, lets use the below as an example.

I earn Â£51k a year. My wife stays home to look after the kids.
my neighbors both work and both earn Â£49.5k EACH.

They get child benefit, i dont.

Just making a point, its not as black and white as the daily mail may have you believe.
		
Click to expand...

And if you have 3 kids its quite a big loss.....


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Back to the old point about affordability... Just saw this stat:

Apparently, last year the number of pregnancies for over 40s outnumbered those under 19 in England & Wales.  

You can slice it either way, that women are leaving it later to have pregnancies as they sort out careers etc, also those under 19 are making educated choices...


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

guest100718 said:



			And if you have 3 kids its quite a big loss.....
		
Click to expand...

I'm soon to have 4...

no problem, i will pay for my own kids. just doesn't seem "fair" that a FAMILY that earn a lot more money than me, get benefits that my kids are not eligible for. we only ever used the CB payments for their activities etc,


----------



## woody69 (Mar 4, 2014)

believe it or not independent nurseries make very little money as profit due to all of the costs involved with looking after children and the high cost involved with ensure child to adult ratios are always maintained. The only way nurseries make a lot of money is when there is a large chain with many locations.


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

woody69 said:



			believe it or not independent nurseries make very little money as profit due to all of the costs involved with looking after children and the high cost involved with ensure child to adult ratios are always maintained. The only way nurseries make a lot of money is when there is a large chain with many locations.
		
Click to expand...

My brother and his wife run 2... they do ok


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But I can whinge about those separated/divorced couples who's children get bursaries and/or grants for university courses on the grounds of the mother's income.  When dad-departed is in fact showering largesse on the family through some clever-dick accountancy scheme/scam (and the same went for Education Maintenance Allowance - now scrapped)

And likes of me and Mrs have to scrape together the money to put ours through uni with absolutely NO help from the state or unis - on the grounds of our income being 'just' over any threshold - conveniently ignoring that living in a very expensive part of the country our disposable income is well clobbered by the costs-of-living/housing.  

And don't start me on unis giving bursaries to attract students with good A-levels - when a lot of these kids have got them through going to private school and whose parent are loaded.  Resentments? moi ? Oui - I have a few 

Click to expand...

How many of those 'generous' ex-husbands are there - compared to the number being chased (or not) by the CSA to provide a basic life for the the ex and their kids!

Don't whinge about the 'benefits' others might be getting. Just make sure you are doing the best yourself/ves! It was, after all, your choice to live in 'a very expensive part of the country'!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Amen to that ! And also don't whinge about losing child support if you earn over Â£50k
		
Click to expand...

And amen to that one too


----------



## Maninblack4612 (Mar 4, 2014)

Originally Posted by *Maninblack4612* 






_Children need to be brought up by their parents. When our kids were small my wife stayed at home & looked after them. It was, financially, a struggle but we, she in particular, wouldn't have wanted it any other way._*Leaving your children in the care of other is, in many people's opinion, the cause of many of the problems with children & young adults today*_. Let the dissenters commence posting!
_


Foxholer said:



			Like Schools! Or Kindergartens!
		
Click to expand...

Actually, yes. The more time the children spend away from your good influence the harder it is to bring them up correctly. At least if a parent is home when they return from school you have the time (& possibly more energy) to correct any bad influences inflicted on them when out of your care.


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			And amen to that one too 

Click to expand...

read post #32. should be done on combined household/family income, not that of an individual. I agree that if you earn over XYZ you shouldnt get it, however the system needs to be fair.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			read post #32. should be done on combined household/family income, not that of an individual. I agree that if you earn over XYZ you shouldnt get it, however the system needs to be fair.
		
Click to expand...

Nah, can't be bothered going back to it but yes, it should be done on the household income.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

Who paying for your kids you or the state?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How many of those 'generous' ex-husbands are there - compared to the number being chased (or not) by the CSA to provide a basic life for the the ex and their kids!

Don't whinge about the 'benefits' others might be getting. Just make sure you are doing the best yourself/ves! It was, after all, your choice to live in 'a very expensive part of the country'!
		
Click to expand...

I'm not whinging about 'benefits' those that need them get and I am not complaining that I don't get any - as we have enough to get by - though at times it is a little nip and tuck.  I am a lot less happy when I see the wealthier taking benefits, grants and subsidies when they do not *need *them - or if they are offered them for spurious reasons.  And I turn the other direction and see those who very much depend upon benefits getting some of theirs removed by a mendacious government who look for the worst in anyone claiming the basest of benefits.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

If you've got 3 kids and are about to have 4 you know what they cost ( i'm not picking on you in particular)- why should the tax payer have to fund your family? I don't get any handouts. There are comments on the thread about the cost of child care and the damaging effects it has on kids development and the issues it causes, surely then they should be cared for by Mothers at home? Then we get the people saying we cant afford to make ends meet with only one of us working,  then we get the moans about childcare costs! Am I missing something? If you cant afford the child care then you cant afford to have a family of the size you have! After all its your choice so please don't moan about it!


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			If you've got 3 kids and are about to have 4 you know what they cost- why should the tax payer have to fund your family? I don't get any handouts
		
Click to expand...

i know exactly how much they cost and i don't get a penny from the state, nor am i asking for any. I am stating that there are families that have more income than my family whom receive child benefit, that's all. Just asking for fairness and a level system to chose who gets and who doesn't.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter I added to my post ( Im not picking on you in particular)


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Rooter I added to my post ( Im not picking on you in particular)
		
Click to expand...

LOL no worries, i was making the point that my kids get well looked after and financially they are 100% my responsibility.

My big bug bear with the whole scenario was they way they did it, looking at individual earners rather than a family income, they took the easy option which see's some very well off families getting benefits they are legally 100% entitled to.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 4, 2014)

MarkA said:



			If you've got 3 kids and are about to have 4 you know what they cost ( i'm not picking on you in particular)- why should the tax payer have to fund your family? I don't get any handouts. There are comments on the thread about the cost of child care and the damaging effects it has on kids development and the issues it causes, *surely then they should be cared for by Mothers at home*? Then we get the people saying we cant afford to make ends meet with only one of us working,  then we get the moans about childcare costs! Am I missing something? If you cant afford the child care then you cant afford to have a family of the size you have! After all its your choice so please don't moan about it!
		
Click to expand...

Ach, you were doing so well.


----------



## Rooter (Mar 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ach, you were doing so well.
		
Click to expand...

Lets assume he meant Parent. To be fair, i would guess that 90% of the families that have a parent stay at home will be the mother, so lets go easy on him!


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			Lets assume he meant Parent. To be fair, i would guess that 90% of the families that have a parent stay at home will be the mother, so lets go easy on him! 

Click to expand...

I did mean parent not mother !!!!


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 4, 2014)

I would suggest that no one paying 40% (or more) income tax should receive any benefits.

Regarding childcare. Of course it is best for children to be raised by their parents and if people want others to care for their offspring then it comes with a cost.  Of course there will be some cases where the state should support but only in cases *genuine* hardship.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ach, you were doing so well.
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean Elton and David?


----------



## Hobbit (Mar 4, 2014)

Rooter said:



			I'm soon to have 4...
		
Click to expand...

Certainly living up to your forum name


----------



## MarkA (Mar 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I would suggest that no one paying 40% (or more) income tax should receive any benefits.

Regarding childcare. Of course it is best for children to be raised by their parents and if people want others to care for their offspring then it comes with a cost.  Of course there will be some cases where the state should support but only in cases *genuine* hardship.
		
Click to expand...

Hardship is one thing but feckless overbreeding is entirely another


----------



## vkurup (Mar 4, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Certainly living up to your forum name 

Click to expand...

:ears:


----------



## Hacker Khan (Mar 5, 2014)

Rooter said:



			Lets assume he meant Parent. To be fair, i would guess that 90% of the families that have a parent stay at home will be the mother, so lets go easy on him! 

Click to expand...

Or you could assume it was a case of unintentional but casual sexist where it is assumed the women would be the one to give up their career?


----------



## Crazyface (Mar 5, 2014)

When my lad was born I was a house husband and it was brilliant. Unfortunately wife at the time resented this, but it was practical as she could earn shed loads more than me. Her resentment grew and eventually kicked me out. Like a fool I didn't contest her having custody, my biggest regret of my entire life and I will be to the day I die. She had not got a clue and unfortunately my son has not gone on to be what he could have been. DO NOT QUESTION THIS STATEMENT ! 
Anyhoo, I say this to warn others. The females are NOT always the best to be the parent to have custody. Also, parents are not always the best to look after the children. Grandchild no1, was a nightmare as a youngster (upto the age of 5) then gradually has got better and is now 11. Grandchild no2, is now being EXACTLY the same. We usually have them over for Sunday dinner, but last Sunday they went out with friends so we had a dinner on our own with, now 20yo lad from previous relationship (don't try and figure all this out) and had a perfect Sunday. No arguements from 11yo. No crying and screaming running round the house like a nutter grabbing anything and everything he should have from 2yo. I've told wifey to have a word. I'm not putting up with that crap anymore. 

Cheers for listening. Feel alot better now.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 5, 2014)

Crazyface said:



			...Anyhoo, I say this to warn others. The females are NOT always the best to be the parent to have custody.
		
Click to expand...

I believe Family Courts very much recognise this now. Of course, they always did - otherwise there would never have been any question about custody would there!



Crazyface said:



			...Also, parents are not always the best to look after the children. Grandchild no1, was a nightmare as a youngster (upto the age of 5) then gradually has got better and is now 11. Grandchild no2, is now being EXACTLY the same. We usually have them over for Sunday dinner, but last Sunday they went out with friends so we had a dinner on our own with, now 20yo lad from previous relationship (don't try and figure all this out) and had a perfect Sunday. No arguements from 11yo. No crying and screaming running round the house like a nutter grabbing anything and everything he should have from 2yo. I've told wifey to have a word. I'm not putting up with that crap anymore. 

Cheers for listening. Feel alot better now.
		
Click to expand...

None of that actually supports an argument that 'parents are not always the best to look after the children'!

Simply that there are different levels of tolerance - and reasons why - from different folk, whether they be family members or not - being family just adds to 'the load'! I'd like to think that we added to several peoples 'education' by insisting that niece actually behave reasonably at our place rather than simply run riot as she did at home and the 1st time she came over! Like you though, it was for 99% selfish reasons!


----------



## MarkA (Mar 5, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			Or you could assume it was a case of unintentional but casual sexist where it is assumed the women would be the one to give up their career?
		
Click to expand...

Or we could of course assume that you were trolling as you've made no other useful contribution to this thread!


----------



## ArnoldArmChewer (Mar 5, 2014)

Why do people think that the state should subsidise their children ?  If you wish to have children you should be prepared to pay for them, if you wish to work & have children you should be prepared to pay for their care costs, nurseries in the main are private enterprises and charge what the local economy will allow, they are a business!!

If you wish your child to go to university you should expect them to pay for it, they are adults receiving adult education for which they will allegedly eventually earn more than those without degree level education, they are therefore investing in their future.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 5, 2014)

Amen to that !:thup:


----------



## JustOne (Mar 5, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			No, it really is very simple - do not whine about the cost of child care, it's irritating.  Your decision to have a child then deal with the consequences.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't that like whinging about shooting 99 and someone telling you not to play golf then? This forum is BUILT on the back of whinging


----------



## Hacker Khan (Mar 5, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Or we could of course assume that you were trolling as you've made no other useful contribution to this thread!
		
Click to expand...

Not trolling, just saying that a theme from this thread seems to be that parents should not have children unless a parent/wife will give up their career and can afford to stop working for so many years to look after it/them.  So it's going back to making people chose between a career or children.  Which in 2014 in a world of job insecurity, high mortgages, student debts, high fuel costs etc etc etc and the general liberation of women is, in my opinion, a bit out of date.  

I'm not advocating people shelling out babies if they have no obvious means to support them and thinking they will just rely on the state to do so.  But then again I am very uncomfortable with making people (and yet again, this will be mostly women) feel guilty about having a career/job and the 'pressure' (examples being from several comments made in this thread) to stay at home and look after children.  As I hoped the world had moved on a bit from that.


----------



## Alex1975 (Mar 5, 2014)

Some interesting views on here!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 5, 2014)

JustOne said:



			Isn't that like whinging about shooting 99 and someone telling you not to play golf then? This forum is BUILT on the back of whinging 

Click to expand...

Errm no, they are entirely different.


----------



## JustOne (Mar 5, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Errm no, they are entirely different.
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			No, it really is very simple - do not whine about the cost of child care, it's irritating.  Your decision to have a child then deal with the consequences.
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			No, it really is very simple - do not whine about shooting 99, it's irritating.  Your decision to play golf then deal with the consequences.
		
Click to expand...

Fair enough, ... they look the same to me :thup:


----------



## Rooter (Mar 5, 2014)

Alex1975 said:



			Some interesting views on here!
		
Click to expand...

you gonna share yours Al?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 5, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Or we could of course assume that you were trolling as you've made* no other useful contribution* to this thread!
		
Click to expand...

[troll mode]
Your wording is either self-contradictory, contains a (confusing) redundancy or sequenced incorrectly!
[/troll mode]
That post of HK's was certainly relevant to the topic - as was at least 1 other of his (a presumption on my part). 

I know of 2 pairs of folk where the guy parked his career and looked after kids while his wife continued hers - child-care having been rejected!


----------



## Alex1975 (Mar 5, 2014)

Rooter said:



			you gonna share yours Al? 

Click to expand...

Ye ok, first things first, *when it comes to children EVERYONE has a different experience!!!* So I dont think anyone is right on wrong (unless they are wrong!).

My wife and I were late to have May, our life plan was not to have children but we changed our minds. When preggo my wife's intent was to go back to work, there were no emotions involved, we did not know what was to come. After 6 months we suddenly realized that we would be better off by something like Â£20 if she went back to work and that she would not get to spend much time with May.

She has not been back to work since, all emotions are now clearly involved and the girls get to be together every day. We are skint, I don't care, we have made the appropriate sacrifices and I would do the same thing again. I LOVE the fact that I have been (just) able to afford them the time to be together in these formative years.

*For me*, I dont understand why you would make something in your image and then have someone else bring it up so you can still afford to get a curry on Friday night.


I am a soppy git and it is different for everyone!


----------



## MarkA (Mar 5, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			Not trolling, just saying that a theme from this thread seems to be that parents should not have children unless a parent/wife will give up their career and can afford to stop working for so many years to look after it/them.  So it's going back to making people chose between a career or children.  Which in 2014 in a world of job insecurity, high mortgages, student debts, high fuel costs etc etc etc and the general liberation of women is, in my opinion, a bit out of date.  

I'm not advocating people shelling out babies if they have no obvious means to support them and thinking they will just rely on the state to do so.  But then again I am very uncomfortable with making people (and yet again, this will be mostly women) feel guilty about having a career/job and the 'pressure' (examples being from several comments made in this thread) to stay at home and look after children.  As I hoped the world had moved on a bit from that.
		
Click to expand...

No, the theme of the thread is don't moan about the cost of childcare if you have kids if you both insist on working, It's your choice after all!
2014 is definitely a time of insecurity and it effects everyone - if you are planning a family or have one, you do what suits you and you can afford, be it working or staying at home. What we don't need is someone bleating about the costs and implications of their decisions - the 'its not fair brigade'. You didn't have to have them or that many did you?  You make your choice and stick with it, previous generations coped with different pressures so  how about just getting on with it like they did?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 5, 2014)

ArnoldArmChewer said:



			Why do people think that the state should subsidise their children ?  If you wish to have children you should be prepared to pay for them, if you wish to work & have children you should be prepared to pay for their care costs, nurseries in the main are private enterprises and charge what the local economy will allow, they are a business!!

If you wish your child to go to university you should expect them to pay for it, they are adults receiving adult education for which they will allegedly eventually earn more than those without degree level education, they are therefore investing in their future.
		
Click to expand...

We have to remember that the state is providing for the welfare of the children - not the parent.  When you view it as benefits going to the 'feckless' parent - then that can stir all sorts of negative emotions - but the alternative is for the state to *not* provide for the welfare and wellbeing of the children.  Do we as a country want to see the streets filled with hungry and poorly clothed children begging in teh streets because their 'feckless' parents don't get money from the state to support them?

Women going out to work and childcare etc - very different issue from child benefits and they shouldn't be conflated,


----------



## MarkA (Mar 5, 2014)

Alex1975 said:



			Ye ok, first things first, *when it comes to children EVERYONE has a different experience!!!* So I dont think anyone is right on wrong (unless they are wrong!).

My wife and I were late to have May, our life plan was not to have children but we changed our minds. When preggo my wife's intent was to go back to work, there were no emotions involved, we did not know what was to come. After 6 months we suddenly realized that we would be better off by something like Â£20 if she went back to work and that she would not get to spend much time with May.

She has not been back to work since, all emotions are now clearly involved and the girls get to be together every day. We are skint, I don't care, we have made the appropriate sacrifices and I would do the same thing again. I LOVE the fact that I have been (just) able to afford them the time to be together in these formative years.

*For me*, I dont understand why you would make something in your image and then have someone else bring it up so you can still afford to get a curry on Friday night.


I am a soppy git and it is different for everyone!
		
Click to expand...


I for one, applaud your ethos!


----------



## Rooter (Mar 5, 2014)

Alex1975 said:



			Ye ok, first things first, *when it comes to children EVERYONE has a different experience!!!* So I dont think anyone is right on wrong (unless they are wrong!).

My wife and I were late to have May, our life plan was not to have children but we changed our minds. When preggo my wife's intent was to go back to work, there were no emotions involved, we did not know what was to come. After 6 months we suddenly realized that we would be better off by something like Â£20 if she went back to work and that she would not get to spend much time with May.

She has not been back to work since, all emotions are now clearly involved and the girls get to be together every day. We are skint, I don't care, we have made the appropriate sacrifices and I would do the same thing again. I LOVE the fact that I have been (just) able to afford them the time to be together in these formative years.

*For me*, I dont understand why you would make something in your image and then have someone else bring it up so you can still afford to get a curry on Friday night.


I am a soppy git and it is different for everyone!
		
Click to expand...

Thanks Al, pretty similar opinion to me. We did stick our first 2 into nursery for 2 x 1/2 days per week, simply for interaction with other kids, this did allow my mrs to do a little part time work. We are just about to do the same with our youngest as she doesnt really get to play with anyone her age, only her older siblings.


----------



## Alex1975 (Mar 5, 2014)

Rooter said:



			Thanks Al, pretty similar opinion to me. We did stick our first 2 into nursery for 2 x 1/2 days per week, simply for interaction with other kids, this did allow my mrs to do a little part time work. We are just about to do the same with our youngest as she doesnt really get to play with anyone her age, only her older siblings.
		
Click to expand...


Yep, May will be 3 soon and its become clear its time she had more contact with other little ones without mum being there. Scary for me but she comes back buzzing from her new little school a couple of morning a week.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			We have to remember that the state is providing for the welfare of the children - not the parent.  When you view it as benefits going to the 'feckless' parent - then that can stir all sorts of negative emotions - but the alternative is for the state to *not* provide for the welfare and wellbeing of the children.  Do we as a country want to see the streets filled with hungry and poorly clothed children begging in teh streets because their 'feckless' parents don't get money from the state to support them?

Women going out to work and childcare etc - very different issue from child benefits and they shouldn't be conflated,
		
Click to expand...

When Parents make a life changing (but natural) decision to create children then this comes with certain responsibilities, not of the State but of the parents.    The decision to have children is in complete contravention to a Mother wishing to peruse a career in the same manner as a single Woman.  Expect to be hard up, expect for the Father to have to work long and hard hours to support his family.  If the Mother decides she wants a career that is more important than raising her offspring then organise the husband to take over her natural role.  But! please don't bleat on that you are hard done by!!


----------



## Break90 (Mar 6, 2014)

When our little one was born (she's 8 this year), we were lucky enough to be able to afford for my wife to take the first 18 months off and stay home with her. 

Then my mum retired and offered her services as a full time nanny, enabling my wife to go back to work, 3 days a week at first, so the best of both worlds I suppose. 

The extra money came in handy, we were not subjected to (IMO) exorbitant childcare fees of 250 per week, and the kid was very well looked after by a member of the family. Not a situation everyone will be in a position to take advantage of, I accept, but it worked very well for us. 

Littl'un is now at full time school, wife works 35 hours a week, and we use pre-school and after school clubs (for which there is a charge). 

We have also kept child benefit as neither of our incomes are 50k individually, although jointly well in excess of 50k. I accept that there is a case to be made for the threshold to be based on household income as opposed to individual, however thems the rules. The 80 odd quid a month doesnt even come close to covering the pre/after school care costs though.


----------

