Workplace Nursery Costs

[SDK^]

I'm sure you'll manage given that people earning far less are paying for your kids. It's shocking to see that people are complaining that the government aren't paying enough for their luxuries while people who can barely put bread on the table are shelling out loads in tax payments.

That's the way the world works when you have shared services.
There is enough opportunity in this country for people who want to earn more, perhaps they should stop complaining and get out and do it.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I'm sure you'll manage given that people earning far less are paying for your kids. It's shocking to see that people are complaining that the government aren't paying enough for their luxuries while people who can barely put bread on the table are shelling out loads in tax payments.

Nonsense - if you're that close to the bread line you'll be paying almost no tax.

Someone on min wage will be paying a whopping £20.52 a week combined tax/NI but you'll get £13.35 per week back in tax credits, leaving a net loss of £7.17 - and I'm sure those on min wage get WAY more than £7.17 in value from other state provided benefits - NHS etc.

So:-

shelling out loads in tax payments

Yeah - £7.17 is loads

 

[Energize]

That's the way the world works when you have shared services.
There is enough opportunity in this country for people who want to earn more, perhaps they should stop complaining and get out and do it.

I'd disagree that there are opportunities, the real unemployment rate is something like 15%, however my issue is with how ungrateful people are, not the system.

Nonsense - if you're that close to the bread line you'll be paying almost no tax.

Someone on min wage will be paying a whopping £20.52 a week combined tax/NI but you'll get £13.35 per week back in tax credits, leaving a net loss of £7.17 - and I'm sure those on min wage get WAY more than £7.17 in value from other state provided benefits - NHS etc.

You do realise you can't live off minimum wage? You have to be earning a lot more than that, and thus be paying a lot more tax than that, and a lot of people can't get tax credits due to age and other factors.

 

[RDM]

Some of those prices per day/child are disgusting, even if it's considered the going rate. Think my mother charges £3/hour for ones she's looked after for years and £3.50/hour for new kids and if they're siblings she'd charge a reduced rate for both (£5/£6 depending on when they started coming). I wish she'd charge more since she's far below what people would normally have to pay elsewhere, but unfortunately she's a bit of a door mat/mug when it comes to the money side of it. Just an example 9:00-5:00, 8 * £3.50 = £28 for the day (meals included), is far cheaper then what most people here seem to be paying for their childcare (based up north so it will be cheaper).

You seem to be contradicting yourself here, on the one side saying your mother is a mug for charging so little whilst decrying those that charge more as disgusting.

 

[SDK^]

You do realise you can't live off minimum wage? You have to be earning a lot more than that, and thus be paying a lot more tax than that, and a lot of people can't get tax credits due to age and other factors.

So what are you suggesting should happen?

Free cash handouts to anyone on min wage?

 

[Energize]

So what are you suggesting should happen?

Free cash handouts to anyone on min wage?

You mean a negative income tax? That's not a bad idea. But that's an entirely separate issue, like I said my issue is just with how ungrateful people are when they should be thankful they get any support at all for their lifestyle choices.

 

[SDK^]

You mean a negative income tax? That's not a bad idea. But that's an entirely separate issue, like I said my issue is just with how ungrateful people are when they should be thankful they get any support at all for their lifestyle choices.

Who's ungrateful ?

 

[SpeedFreak]

I'm sure you'll manage given that people earning far less are paying for your kids. It's shocking to see that people are complaining that the government aren't paying enough for their luxuries while people who can barely put bread on the table are shelling out loads in tax payments.

Well I don't see anything in my posts that indicates that I expect the government to pay. You also seem mistaken in understanding taxation if you that those who earn the least pay "loads" in tax, either in actual or % terms.

My point was that if we can just afford it, those on a 50k income probably could not

 

[Deleted member 66701]

You do realise you can't live off minimum wage? You have to be earning a lot more than that, and thus be paying a lot more tax than that, and a lot of people can't get tax credits due to age and other factors.

Of course you can, don't talk nonsense.

It wont be a comfortable life (in fact you'd be classed as living in poverty) but it's perfectly doable.

 

[Energize]

Of course you can, don't talk nonsense.

It wont be a comfortable life (in fact you'd be classed as living in poverty) but it's perfectly doable.

That's a complete contradiction, if you're in poverty then by definition it's not a living wage. You can't even rent a one bedroom flat in many places for that amount.

Who's ungrateful ?

People saying how much of a joke it is to only get x amount of support, complaints about people wanting at least minimum wage for child care.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

That's a complete contradiction, if you're in poverty then by definition it's not a living wage.

Ah, well that's another issue - how much do you need to earn just to survive - the min wage will cover that. And how much do you need to earn to live a healthy, productive life - the living wage should cover that.

You can't even rent a one bedroom flat in many places for that amount.

Well, if you're only skilled enough to get a min wage job then you'd be a fool to live in those areas (like London etc).

 

[Energize]

Well, if you're only skilled enough to get a min wage job then you'd be a fool to live in those areas (like London etc).

No not London, the North West. And you're out of touch with reality if you think skills matter in the day and age of high unemployment.

 

[D.P.]

Before my lad turned 3 we were paying 45 for the 1 day a week now hes 3 he gets the 15 hours a week so goes 3 hours a day missis is a stay at home mum

now before any of you moan wanting to know why he goes to nursury while shes a stay at home mum it helps my son no end as hes autistic wont be the 1st argument ive had about it

As much as I would want to be a stay at home dad there are huge benefits for the child to go to child care. They learn how to socialize and interact with other children.

 

[v0n]

Extortionate as it might be to the parent, in terms of profitability I don't know if I would open childcare place at those prices. A room/place with facilities to fit 10-15 kids in the city will cost easily 1500-2000 a month minimum in rental. We are talking basement conditions. Add liability insurance, bills, meals, consumables, your basic running costs will be minimum £3k. Easily. Then three members of staff, £2k pre-tax each. Effectively you need 10 kids at £50 per head, 20 days a month to pay for just the basic costs. You need more kids. But then you need bigger space, that's going to push the costs again etc.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

No not London, the North West. And you're out of touch with reality if you think skills matter in the day and age of high unemployment.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-41899288.html

First search.

Loads of min wage jobs in Blackpool.

Min wage job @ 37hrs a week is £233, minus £7 from prev, leaves £226, subtract £50 rent and that leaves £176 per week. Are you telling me after rent £176 per week isn't enough to live on?

Then three members of staff, £2k pre-tax each.

Rofl, 90% of nurseries pay min wage, so that's £1k a month per member of staff.

 

[Energize]

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-41899288.html

First search.

Loads of min wage jobs in Blackpool.

Min wage job @ 37hrs a week is £233, minus £7 from prev, leaves £226, subtract £50 rent and that leaves £176 per week. Are you telling me after rent £176 per week isn't enough to live on?

Well it's actually more than £50 when you take the fees into account, and you'd probably end up stabbed to death. But the fact that people forced to live in places like that are paying for other peoples kids, just serves to reinforce my point even further

 

[SDK^]

But the fact that people forced to live in places like that are paying for other peoples kids, just serves to reinforce my point even further

Get over it.
As I posted earlier - that's how shared services work. Everyone pays into it and those with more money pay more through higher tax rates.

 

[Energize]

Get over it.
As I posted earlier - that's how shared services work. Everyone pays into it and those with more money pay more through higher tax rates.

You seem to have a short memory...

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Well it's actually more than £50 when you take the fees into account,

Drop the pedantry.

and you'd probably end up stabbed to death.

Then they need to get a job that pays more. But still, it's warm, dry, a place to prepare food, wash and sleep. Are there any requirements missing in order to survive?

people forced to live in places like that are paying for other peoples kids

But they aren't as I've already demonstrated. They are contributing a gross £7 to the government if they are on min wage/full time. That £7 wont even cover their own draw on public services, let alone help pay for other peoples.

In fact, you've got to be earning approx £34k before you become a net contributor. If you earn below £34k, you get more out than you put in.

So, if you said "those earning above £34k are helping to pay for other peoples children" then I'd agree with you. But then again, is there anything wrong with that, seeing as children are our future and it's in every ones interest to ensure they are productive members of society?

 

[Energize]

But they aren't as I've already demonstrated. They are contributing a gross £7 to the government if they are on min wage/full time. That £7 wont even cover their own draw on public services, let alone help pay for other peoples.

I'm not going to repeat why your calculations are incorrect.

In fact, you've got to be earning approx £34k before you become a net contributor. If you earn below £34k, you get more out than you put in.

So, if you said "those earning above £34k are helping to pay for other peoples children" then I'd agree with you. But then again, is there anything wrong with that, seeing as children are our future and it's in every ones interest to ensure they are productive members of society?

I feel like a broken record today, I said my issue was with people being ungrateful for it.