this is in fact true for almost all early years interventions, which is yet another reason why the lack of childcare support in the UK is criminal - ThreadSky

lottelydia.bsky.social • 17 days ago

this is in fact true for almost all early years interventions, which is yet another reason why the lack of childcare support in the UK is criminal

Reposted from Dan Davies

it feels almost indecent to say this since the primary reason for removing children from poverty is simply removing children from poverty. but it is really well established fact that child poverty is extremely expensive in the long term and this policy costs money.

Comments

lookslikealice.bsky.social•17 days ago

I’d say the same about mental health support for parents, including community spaces that reduce isolation.

apexcuppa.bsky.social•17 days ago

Coverage of the Lib Dems' childcare pledge from 2019.

"Lib Dem manifesto spending analysed: Eye-watering sums for young families but what about pensioners?"

Refers to £14bn for universal childcare (35hrs per week, 2-4 year olds) as an "eye watering sum".

Meanwhile triple lock = £11bn, that's OK

lottelydia.bsky.social•17 days ago

almost everything you can do to support babies, children and young people — from antenatal classes, to paid parental leave, to early years care, to free school meals, to sure start centres and libraries and youth groups — saves the state money in the long run

vonneudeck.com•17 days ago

Unfortunately for people who want social stratification to not change all these interventions also reliably distribute chances in life more equally and hence make it much harder to carve out a privileged niche for your own children. It also makes the population as a whole less exploitable

risingson2.bsky.social•17 days ago

yeah, that is the thing, "in the long run". What politician worries about the long run anymore?

mrblifil.bsky.social•17 days ago

The right wing hates planning and actual conservation of resources. They want the id to rule and they take personal offense to the notion of delaying gratification to realize common goals.

wkymary.bsky.social•17 days ago

I was a Head Start teacher. I know to the depths of my soul we made a difference in family lives. Benefiting the state was a side effect. But if it keeps funding flowing, that’s fine.

lottelydia.bsky.social•17 days ago

as @dsquareddigest.bsky.social says, this isn’t anywhere close to the best reason to implement these policies, but it does show why cutting these policies to save money is misguided

louiestowell.bsky.social•17 days ago

Yes - even if we're talking to capitalism on capitalism's own terms, it is SO COUNTER PRODUCTIVE. (Obviously, feeding children is a worthwhile goal in itself). But still. They're playing their own game wrong!

lottelydia.bsky.social•17 days ago

(imo a lot of political distaste for this spending comes from people in the UK simply not liking children or parents very much, and I’m not sure the economic argument will ever cut through in that context. how to explain you should want to help and protect *even other people’s* children????)

anthonygeorgeff.bsky.social•17 days ago

There’s a whole section of the community, especially older people that are obsessed with kids being harmed. They hate playgrounds where kids can’t break an arm. And any child breaking any law is worse than any adult criminal.
I don’t know what causes this.

anthonygeorgeff.bsky.social•17 days ago

We had a new shopping centre where the escalators were sharp and a couple of kids got serious injuries from falling.
Did these people say ‘we should probably have escalators where kids don’t get serious injuries just by falling over’? They did not.

edhodgson.bsky.social•17 days ago

How about
"My parents are dead, why should I be paying for other old people?"

jane-n.bsky.social•17 days ago

And even if you don’t like children, they do eventually grow out of it; why wouldn’t you want to help them become productive, fully functioning, useful adults?

warblin.bsky.social•17 days ago

And the opposite result means more crime, anti-social disorder and so on as well - who wants to live beside all that? Just paying for some food help and things for them to do (rather than banning them from parks which was the last place they had to hang out) helps them become decent humans.

warblin.bsky.social•17 days ago

Also much as everyone wants to blame the poor (and their poor kids) for crime - it's hard to live in a world where you're shown such ostentatious consumption everywhere but you have nothing yourself. Not excusing violence ... but then having nothing can lead to bad parenting choices there too.

warblin.bsky.social•17 days ago

In my mind it was the initial cutting of youth clubs that set this whole thing going downhill. I mean - how much does it really cost for a community hall, a couple of adult supervisors and a ping pong table? It's worth it in the long run!

tompaxton.bsky.social•17 days ago

I once had this discussion with a lady who had no children whilst I was holding a tiny baby. When she said that she is supporting my baby with her taxes I carefully explained that we were pre-adoptive foster parents caring for the baby until her adoption. She visibly shrank!

sanscelerien.bsky.social•17 days ago

I suspect the reasoning is more likely to be that "someone else will pay for it". Rich people just don't want to be taxed so their fortunes can increase steadily without much effort.

davehb.bsky.social•17 days ago

“But MY parents didn’t need these supports!”

And the world has changed immensely in the years since

mllesharris.bsky.social•17 days ago

As someone who doesn’t have children I kind of think it’s a good idea for other people’s children to be growing up with the radical idea that the state might want to care for people. That sense of community might come in handy for me at some point.

soapachu.bsky.social•17 days ago

Yep; even if you don't particularly like kids or parents, you can support social contracts from a position of pure self-interest.

I don't have kids, but I want all kids to have the best opportunities, education, healthcare and support possible. Only good things can come of that.

velf.bsky.social•16 days ago

Yep. Otherwise you end up with alleged grownups who think the greatest threat to Western civilisation is empathy...

theangelofhistory.bsky.social•17 days ago

Also people who for a variety of reasons adopted a “traditional” approach and thus don’t want anyone else doing anything else

niebieskirower.bsky.social•17 days ago

I agree, I think there is also an idea that you like children in general but not *those* children, the wrong kind of children

niebieskirower.bsky.social•17 days ago

I remember arguments about ENA when it was being abolished and some people definitely felt that EMA was for bad teenagers who shouldn't get anything.

cjeggett.co.uk•17 days ago

I've never been able to pin it down. Is it because someone else is getting something they're not? It's too simple. My experience is that 99% of people love having happy kids around them but that the state can't reflect this will in policy, ever.

judithfairbairn.bsky.social•17 days ago

All of this - more support needs to go to all parents. But not based on the number children they have (wrong incentive, from an environmental perspective). Just pay all parents generously to raise a family and offer exceptional family services.