Hacker News Reader

Comment by closeparen | Hacker News Reader

I’ve always wondered how this can sanity-check. Surely the pool of potential child-care workers is approximately all of humanity, and one worker can care for several children. It’s socially important, but not scarce. How, then, do childcare costs exceed the productive capacity of so many educated, specialized, experienced professionals?

This would seem to indicate that many jobs are bullshit, wages are suppressed, or there is artificial scarcity in the day care business.

View on HN

Supply/Demand, also consideration when government get involved it's like doing brain surgery with a base ball bat (its going to get messy)

To my understanding talking to the ladies at the child-care center's. The center is required to not exceed x number of children per day/per hour. They can only hire people with the clearance to supervise children after getting their Certificate 3 in child care. Then the staff need to under-go skills/training on their time to improve working with children.

Then you have insurance for the workers, building and also the necessary security and fire drills to be conducted regularly and kept up-to-date.

You have over-time pay, inclusive of when parents are late to pick up the children from day care.

I mean sure, regulation adds some friction, but it seems incredible that the childcare certificate regime could be so difficult that it prevents legions of un/underemployed workers from meeting the extreme demand for childcare services.

It’s a barrier, but so is a Masters in Education. My mother had one, as well 15+ years of classroom experience, and still found it less economically favorable to teach 25 kids vs. directly care for my brother.

I agree it's incredible but (shurg) it's what is. Granted like I said before on the top above/bellow the only real choice Women can make is to Marry or Partner who can financially support them and there children during the first five years. Then once the children go to kinder-garden, school they re-enter the work-force on a part-time basis.

Though I don't have the numbers with me but here in Australia Asian families out-source the raring of infant's and children to the grand-parents. Although talk to any Western family (especially baby boomers) they want nothing to do with raising grand-children.

> but it seems incredible that the childcare certificate regime could be so difficult that it prevents legions of un/underemployed workers from meeting the extreme demand for childcare services.

One big factor is the number of convicted felons, ~10% for the general population and significantly higher for the un/underemployed, that's a huge amount of the potential workforce gone. Another win for the war on drugs.

And yet the costs of all of those pale in comparison to rents paid on the school building. In my area, at least, that's the line item that dominates.

That rent then usually gets pumped straight into the bottom line of some REIT or a millionaire's property portfolio.

Back when property taxes were higher, building rents were lower (because as you pointed out, supply usually meets demand) and those taxes helped pay for things like, well, childcare.... rather than yachts.

But sure, we have regulations that keep children safe too, and it's true that they impose a cost.

Childcare was just as exorbitant in my hometown with its glut of real estate (due to being a shadow of its 20th century industrial peak). In many places you’re allowed to run a small childcare facility out of your house (the one permitted commercial use in residential zones). I don’t think the facilities costs can explain it either.

One big thing is income tax and benefits. Often the lower your income the better. In New Zealand there are a huge number of extra payments you miss out on if you work more, working for families, lower taxes, WINZ child care and more. So if you earn more than someone in working in childcare you have to earn significantly more to cover the taxes (approx 25% in NZ) you're paying and to cover the loss in benefits you don't get.

Add to this that tax benefits are particularly friendly towards single income families, which leads to the second income being taxed at the marginal rate of the first.

> Surely the pool of potential child-care workers is approximately all of humanity, and one worker can care for several children.

Speaking as a parent, I don't consider every Tom, Dick and Henrietta off the street as equivalent caretakers for my child. The pool of potential child care workers is much, much lower than "all of humanity".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com