This (potent cost-effectiveness of early childhood assistance) has been known by researchers for decades BUT is not part of any significant policy discussion in the USA as we continue with “we hate what FDR accomplished” self-destruction, from effective social strategies to NATO to…..
I am now an aging rich person, from both good luck (parents and their family sociology, being a “rather pretty smart athletic surfer boy” when the ancient gay network of mutual assistance was still quietly very effective, accidentally having a bizarre love of “mathematics of complexity” at just the right time), and also of disciplined hard work (mostly family sociology again, but some was my own internal ferocity).
Sadly, I find that I actively detest many of the rich persons I meet nowadays, as most of them are not self-made, profoundly ignorant of larger social reality, heedlessly wield enormous power, and via politics even more power is now flowing into their nasty manicured hands.
Thiel, Vance, and many others of the powers that be of the plutocratic politicoes want more childbirths, but the idea of actually providing proven cost-effective assistance is verboten. I see that as an ideological mental/social/block permeating the ever more dominant power in the USA — puffed up wealthy idiots [using that word not as a mere crude derogatory burst but in its powerfully political original Greek sense].
Super cool, thanks for sharing! Naysayers will argue that it costs too much. They’d be wrong, getting more women into the workforce more than pays for the cost.
“The system pays for itself – it brings women into the workplace and they pay taxes,” said Fortin, a leading expert on the economics of subsidized childcare. “You get more money flowing into government coffers.” This extra tax revenue actually exceeds what the government initially paid to establish the universal childcare system, he said.
What about other benefits? Looks like universal child care is a win, win, win, win!
Today, Quebec has among the highest female labor force participation rates in the world right next to Sweden, while the US lags more than 10% behind. In addition, the gender pay gap – the difference between the earnings of men and women – is smaller in Quebec, where women typically earn 91 cents on the male dollar, than the US, where women earn just 85 cents.
Measuring the causal impact of Quebec’s subsidized childcare on factors such as poverty and social assistance is an imprecise science, but Fortin points out that the number of single-parent families on social assistance in Quebec plummeted by more than 50% in the decade following the reform. Today, Fortin calculated exclusively for the Guardian, that Quebec has 75% fewer single-parent families on social assistance than it did in 1996.
It’s also had a tremendous impact on childhood wellbeing. In 1996, child poverty rates across Canada were at an all-time high and children in Quebec were among the worst off. Today, it’s the opposite. According to the most recent figures, Quebec’s child poverty rate was 44% lower than all other Canadian provinces.
Women in Unionized jobs earn the same amount as their Male counterparts. When there are not any unions the Non -Union shops find ways to decrease the worth of females. I found on the job that while women were never as strong as I was they could keep up and do the same job. They found ways to compensate for their strength using leverage. I worked in the telephone industry and did a number of jobs from computer programming, which the women excelled in, to climbing poles and lifting manhole covers. The women had no problem climbing poles but the manholes, by design, were a little heavy for them. But they came up with a manhole tool that they could use to get around it. I never understood why anyone wouldn’t pay women the same amount of money as a man when they were doing the same job.