Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Experts in Wills, Trusts
& Estate Planning

ACT Child Care the most expensive in the country

By johnboy - 6 March 2006 28

The Canberra Times is reporting that we can add the country’s most expensive child care to the list of reasons not to want to live in the ACT.

If the government is responsible for offering free education (and defacto childcare) from k-12 why aren’t they also running free childcare? I imagine the long term economic benefits would be immense.

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
ACT Child Care the most expensive in the country
bonfire 4:53 pm 06 Mar 06

im sorry, i think my point is being missed:

having children is a lifestyle choice.

why must i fund your choice when you have the money to do so.

Im all for spending public money on worthwhile things including social welfare, health, education, housing, public infrastructure etc.

but just tell me why i should effectively subsidise someone elses childcare costs ?

its nonsensical and leads to a general ‘see a cow milk it – gimme more free gravy’ mentality.

which leads to a second and unrelated point – yes women should stay at home and raise their children. or should we just hand them to commercial child carers for social engineering?

its called committment. to your children.

i wish i could find that leunig cartoon ‘Thoughts of a Baby Lying in a Child Care Centre’ which summed it up nicely.

ORL 4:51 pm 06 Mar 06

And what are you really paying for?
Some chick to feed your kid apples and oranges while you are at work?

Lucky I don’t have that “want a child gene” going on so I’ll never have to worry!

nyssa76 4:47 pm 06 Mar 06

Oh and bonfire, we are talking about the baby boomers, who are now “known” for their lack of family needs.

Sure their parents babysat their children for them and that was ok. But now? Most baby boomers don’t want to do that, so parents have NO choice but to 1) have mum stay at home and barely survive on one wage or 2) both parents work and the child goes into childcare.

People can’t live on one wage anymore – unless one earns over $60K on their own.

Try living off $400 a fortnight with 3 children, paying rent, food and utilities. We had NO extras – an extra (if you want to call it that) was a 70c lemonade icypole for the kids.

I went back to work.

nyssa76 4:30 pm 06 Mar 06

True Thumper but when your husband is away with the navy, you have little choice but to take carer’s leave when your children are sick.

I normally use my 2 weeks sick leave for the kids, however, now that I have bronchitis and asthma, I have had to use it for myself – the first time in 3 yrs.

Society still “expects” the woman to drop everything to take care of the kids. What about the father taking a day off once in a while for the sick children? That way the people in the office could “marvel” at his nuturing attitude as opposed to “attacking” the mother who is expected to do it.

RandomGit 4:29 pm 06 Mar 06

So I’m not the only one who saw Logans Run? Good-O

bonfire, if you don’t feed childcare with your taxes, who is going to grow up to pump your gas and clean your office?

That we do this whole civilisation thing as a group to ensure we keep making babies effectively obviously escapes you. But thats ok, were your conceit an actual thing I could wade slowly through it, so I understand why you feel the urge to say these things.

Thumper 4:23 pm 06 Mar 06

Bonfire does have a legitimate argument here in that certain women I have worked with use their children as an excuse to simply bugger off from work on carers leave at a moments notice, therefore leaving urgent work for the rest of the team to pick up.

And throw in a weeks leave or two every school holidays and you can get my drift.

I am not however saying that everyone is like that, but I’ve seen it happen on numerous occassions and it sometimes appears that those without kids draw the short end of the straw.

I had three kids, well, my ex wife did, I worked, she looked after them, and yes, life was quite difficult but we coped because that was the decision we made.

Anyway, back to work…


Mr_Shab 4:23 pm 06 Mar 06

I think Bonfire sits in the “Government isn’t allowed to spend money on anything”-camp. Oh yeah…except police, and places to lock people up and “rehabilitate” them.

I’m reluctant to say it, but sometimes you gotta spend money to make it. More mums out working = more money being spent = more vibrant local economy.

Plus, we’re in the middle of a skills shortage, so I think potentially putting half the workforce out of the picture for a few years of their lives isn’t the best idea.

LurkerGal 4:04 pm 06 Mar 06

Yep, they were all euthenased at 30. Good plan! I like it a lot.

Bonfire, I don’t think my husband will support me. He’s a bit busy with his girlfriend. Anyway, according to Peter Costello, YOU are the one letting the country down. Everyone should be having more children.

LG, sleeping well at night knowing she did as she was told. And chortling at Bonfire’s dinosaur attitude because it’s funny.

nyssa76 2:43 pm 06 Mar 06

What’s that movie called where the people who are a certain age die so as to not put “pressure” on the rest of society? (Logan’s Run???)

Perhaps the point isn’t that children are a “lifestyle choice”, we should introduce mandatory euthanasia for anyone over 45yo.

Right bonfire?

bonfire 2:41 pm 06 Mar 06

lg that may be your solution, but just explain why i should fund your childs care with my tax dollars. you gave birth you should bear all costs.

do i get a tax break for my lifestyle choices ?

perhaps a coal rebate to run the stanley steamer ?

the problem with these ridiculous subsidies is that once you get on the teat, you never want to get off.

why cant nana babysit the little darling. or stay home until the child is of school age whiel your husband supports you.

sure, there may be a few sacrifices like one less trip to maccas or one less dvd or whatever else you blow your discretionary income on, but while you have the bucks to spare why should i subsidise your lifestyle choice.

johnboy 2:20 pm 06 Mar 06

The problem bonfire is that society wants people to make that lifestyle choice.

In which case more incentives would appear to be needed.

LurkerGal 1:55 pm 06 Mar 06

Perhaps you would prefer the parents stayed at home and lived off the government?

nyssa76 1:46 pm 06 Mar 06

Yes it is a “lifestyle choice” – and their taxes, when they are older will pay for the many things you will need as you get older.

It’s a circular argument.

bonfire 1:16 pm 06 Mar 06

having children is a lifestyle choice. if you cant cope with paying chidcare fees, get a vasectomy.

andy 11:55 am 06 Mar 06

shit.. the canberra times is reporting something ?

I delivered pizza to a house on friday night that had one of those “complimentary” CT issues sittin on the doorstep. It was yellowed and old, and been there since the Friday before.
Even free, noone reads it.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site