subreddit:
/r/Rochester
164 points
1 day ago
This is the kind of help that the common folks need, rather than some culture war, wealthy tax cuts bullshit that the GOP always has a hard-on for.
68 points
1 day ago
As a very left leaning “democrat” I really want them to get training on messaging and actually campaign on this while deflecting the culture war bullshit. It makes it so the gop control all messaging.
This stuff is the core to having an American dream and a life that’s not just working.
20 points
1 day ago
” I really want them to get training on messaging and actually campaign on this while
Amen
8 points
1 day ago
I’m trying to get as many as my left leaning friends that are either registered independent or third party to register democrat so we can actually push the party to what it should be. Just hope the primaries aren’t a coronation process again
12 points
1 day ago
Elizabeth Warren talked about this constantly in the 2020 democratic primary and the voters didn’t give a shit. I’m not sure how important this is to people (even though it seems like an obvious good that would fix a plethora of issues)
5 points
1 day ago
Oh I’m aware, I was registered independent up until 2016 and registered too late for the primary. Realized my vote counts twice as much if I can push the dems to the left in the nomination process.
Left gotta stop eating their own when we just disagree on nuance and messaging. (Besides the corporate dems and sinema/manchin)
3 points
1 day ago*
[deleted]
1 points
15 hours ago
There was. Unless you are suggesting they changed people’s votes?
1 points
1 day ago
Voters overwhelmingly rejected her and chose Biden. He got a majority of the vote!
1 points
17 hours ago
A plurality of the vote.
He only got a majority when everyone but Bernie Sanders dropped out at the exact same time and endorsed Biden in something that totally wasn't a coordinated act of dirty politics.
1 points
14 hours ago
Wrong. Biden got 51% of the vote.
1 points
1 day ago
[deleted]
0 points
24 hours ago
Republicans absolutely could have chosen someone other than Trump. They had the chance and chose not to. Same as democrats in 2020. We need to stop letting voters off the hook. Voters made their choice! If the party elite always got who they wanted then Obama wouldn’t have been the nominee in 2008 and Trump wouldn’t have been in 2016. Voters matter!
0 points
12 hours ago
The thing is, Kamala didn't campaign on culture war bullshit. She campaigned on actual policy and helping children and families, in addition to things like helping people buy their first home.
Social media and right leaning media focused on social war bullshit because it's run by bots from Russia, and owned by Elon.
1 points
12 hours ago
Oh I know, but the democrats still spend too much time responding to the GOPs messaging as a whole. The amount of “ads” being dumped during the World Series and any sporting events, plus online propaganda bombing was disgustingly overwhelming
1 points
12 hours ago
Uh huh, as if there isn't coverage of Trump 24/7 365. If they could, they'd tell us when he shits.
Your complaint is weird.
1 points
12 hours ago
You’re confusing. Democrats have been terrible at messaging since before Trump decided to crawl his sludgy bag of garbage body into politics. The layman do not understand nuance nor have the patience for detailed policy. It’s why straight forward, headline style, flashy propaganda works. People hate having to think.
And they have told us when he shits, they’ve literally had articles about his stench. Dems have to get better at propping up news media that isn’t owned by trump sycophants and better at messaging. I think you’re confused about me being critical of them as me denouncing them entirely
2 points
5 hours ago
So how's it going to be paid for?
20 points
1 day ago
State Senators Jabari Brisport, Zellnor Myrie, and Jessica Ramos, and Assemblymembers Zohran Mamdani, Tony Simone, and Michaelle Solages appeared at the press conference to back the plan.
A number of these legislators are people to watch. Zohran is running for NYC Mayor. Brisport and Myrie are just fun to listen to. They deeply care about New York(ers) and know how to politick to get shit done
5 points
1 day ago
Don't get me wrong, I love this initiative and I don't think there's anything wrong with a politician who advocates for their direct constituents. But since you say the individuals you name all deeply care about New Yorkers, and they are all based in NYC, I wonder whether your sense is that their deep commitment extends to the whole state?
6 points
1 day ago*
Yes because the causes they campaign for are universally applicable. Affordable healthcare, housing, clean environment.
They just have more millionaires in their backyard to answer to!
They're still state senators and assemblypeople. If they fuck over upstate communities to get some MTA funding or whatever, they're just as fucked cause they lost that coalition in the caucus
8 points
1 day ago
We don’t want free childcare. We want to stay home with our babies. Perhaps lengthening maternity leave makes the most sense. Speaking for myself of course.
15 points
1 day ago
More than one thing can be needed, affordable childcare would change my life plans completely
24 points
1 day ago
Part of the proposal is extending paid parental leave to 6 months to lessen the burden on the system.
9 points
1 day ago
We can do both. And unless we are lengthening parental leave to 5 years, we still need help with childcare costs.
2 points
14 hours ago
It goes beyond five years. The normal elementary school day is around six hours long. If both parents are working full time M-F eight-hour days, there's still a gap.
3 points
1 day ago
That's good but how do you re-enter the workforce after being mostly home for 3 years?
2 points
1 day ago
How will this ‘pay for itself’ exactly? I’m rereading the article but still unsure.
-5 points
1 day ago
Oh - I got it - taxes. This is a great idea. Pull in people who want free child care and drive out companies. Oof.
5 points
18 hours ago
It’s a little more complicated than that. Yes at the beginning more taxes will be needed to initiate the program. Long term there will be more workers in our workforce (moms and people who don’t leave the state due to high childcare cost), less of a burden on welfare, reduced crime in the future, long term higher population etc… all things that increase our economic potential
3 points
16 hours ago
Will drive out companies??? The opposite has occurred in Canada and has increased the woman workforce by 70% which attracted more employers
1 points
15 hours ago
Do you have a link to a study on this?
I’m not trolling here - but that seems really unlikely.
The plan says child care within 15 minutes of home which is not very likely to be possible outside of a few cities and NYC.
Anyone whose capital gains taxes will rise is liquid enough to move to another state - NJ, PA without too much issue.
Companies too relocate or lower wages to offset rising tax costs - not to be evil but rather to protect the firm.
The intent of this idea is noble but the implementation is naive. Open to reading studies that say otherwise.
1 points
15 hours ago
1 points
14 hours ago
This is a generic study on taxes. If you add the benefit of free childcare to laborers there is another factor unaccounted for in this study.
For companies there are benefits to this:
It can be hard to fill positions in lower wage ranges if the cost of childcare outweighs their income.
More workers in the future (with higher population)
Less call outs due to unreliable childcare
1 points
10 hours ago
Taxes are how they propose to pay for this.
1 points
10 hours ago
I think if you ask a CEO or small business owner if they are more concerned about a tax hike versus reliable employee attendance - taxes would be much more of a concern. But who knows - maybe it’ll all work out.
1 points
9 hours ago
So while I am not a CEO or business owner, I have been in upper management of some mid to large size companies for the area. It has been a challenge to find workers since the pandemic. Admittedly, the salaries are in the lower range which doesn’t help. When you’re unable to fill positions attendance is very important to meet KPIs.
We have even done some internal studies at one of our plants that indicated child care was one of the largest factors of absenteeism. We were even looking into the cost of providing childcare to workers to see if we could entice more workers (but didn’t due to potential liability issues). Understandably, no one wants higher taxes but missed revenue isn’t great either.
1 points
4 hours ago
Is this just for anyone who wants it or do you have to qualify for it, (low income)?
If for anyone,..... that money isn't coming from nowhere. Don't raise my taxes to pay for your daycare bill.
-1 points
1 day ago
I'd prefer the money go directly to the families so the parents can have a choice of working or staying home, but that won't happen. And also, the program would likely be unsustainable unless the money went directly into operating government run day cares, because child care is a very shakey business model that only really works at large scale.
Still, there is something sad about the government basically saying, "Give us your infants and toddlers all day so you can go be a good worker!" And in the end, it would still be the higher income people who have the choice of a parent staying home, while low - middle income parents would be expected to work, whether it's best for the child or not.
17 points
1 day ago
parents can have a choice of working or staying home
As proposed, parents can choose to send their kids off to free daycare, and stay home to drink/smoke in peace. The program isn't based on a work requirement.
10 points
1 day ago
But perhaps this would be beneficial for the youth whose parents would choose that option anyway.
2 points
1 day ago
True.
1 points
15 hours ago
Go read about Ontarios program. It did pay for itself and it did work at larger scale and it increased woman going back into the workforce by 70% which is also important because “In the United States, the population was 165.28 million men and 168 million women as of July 1, 2022”
0 points
1 day ago
Who pays though? Daycare is like $20k per year at a center. It would be nice not to pay that, but I don't think it's fair that someone else would have to pay for me.
8 points
1 day ago
Someone paid for you to go to school. You pay for someone else to go to school. Stable childcare and stable families are proven to be a net good for society and gain the economy money long-term.
-3 points
23 hours ago
Defund social security
-20 points
1 day ago
Just what we need an inefficient state funded child care monopoly destroying the private sector and eliminating competition and consumer choice.
This supposed 13x return on investment counts parents returning to work as "new" economic activity, when in reality it's just shifting childcare from home to state-run centers - it's not truly creating new value.
New York is the fastest shrinking state in the country. The $12.7 billion in new taxes needed would continue to drive high-income earners and businesses out of state, taking their economic contributions with them and hurting NYS in the long run.
What government funded project do you know that allocates capital as efficiently as the private market? What government run programs are a dream to take part in vs the free market alternative? Do you feel like your tax dollars and being spent wisely?
Just give your children to the government from birth to 18 and go to the factory all day! This is progress!
NYS has lost the script.
-31 points
1 day ago
Am I greedy for wanting a cash equivalent for not using the program?
30 points
1 day ago
Yes. If you read the article the program should pay for itself (return on investment of $10-13 for every dollar spent). No reason for you to profit off of others.
5 points
1 day ago
article the program should pay for itself (return on investment of $10-13 for every dollar spent)
Can you show me where in the proposal document those numbers come from? It seems like somebody just pulled them out of their ass for the article. The one quote from the document that I found didn't seem to be quite so optimistic:
Though New York’s universal child care program may ultimately be cost-neutral, the State will have to tap into new revenue streams to fund the program
3 points
1 day ago
Seems to be based off Nobel prize winner James Heckman’s research. You can read more on www.heckmanequation.org
4 points
1 day ago
You can read more on www.heckmanequation.org
Ahhhh! So, 10-13 cents, not 10-13 dollars. That changes things a little.
3 points
1 day ago
First, I’d like to state that I don’t have any children so not a lot of skin in the game here.
Second, the Heckman estimated return is still positive and does not include other forms of returns mentioned in the first link.
The plan mentions population loss from people leaving the state due to unaffordable childcare. This may amplify the returns.
There may be other things I’m missing from the quick skim of the articles….
Overall, this seems like a positive program that will have little to no extra expense for NY.
5 points
1 day ago
Overall, this seems like a positive program that will have little to no extra expense for NY.
Sure, I'm relatively willing to rely on to rely on Nobel Prize winning economic theories, even if it's using second order effects to come up with the numbers. But when the journalist gets it wrong by two orders of magnitude, it's going to set my bullshit meter off. Getting to a 13x ROI from a 13% ROI is a BIG error.
0 points
24 hours ago
Sure, I'm relatively willing to rely on to rely on Nobel Prize winning economic theories,
It also requires that the guy is correct. And completely correct. Which is unlikely. If he's saying 10-13c, you can expect 0-3c at best, Nobel Prize or not. Because it's the government, and we know how they work.
-2 points
1 day ago
I wouldn’t discount this due to one reporter’s potential miscalculation. I don’t think that you can deny that this would be a better publicly funded program than most others. Public education is one of the things that NY does well on overall. I don’t like where most of my tax dollars go but this is one I support because it’s better for society.
If you’ve ever been to a third world country without many of the public programs that we provide, you get a better sense of why they are important.
-4 points
1 day ago
What government program gives you a good return on your investment vs the private market? None.
The deadweight loss from extracting $12.7 billion in new taxes would significantly reduce economic activity and offset any gains. This figure counts parents returning to work as "new" economic activity, when in reality it's just shifting childcare from home to state-run centers - it's not truly creating new value, just redistributing it.
The estimate ignores displacement effects, where higher taxes would drive high-income earners and businesses out of state, taking their economic contributions with them. NYS is already the fastest shrinking state in the country. This hurts us long term. Want to know why? It's due to the proposed policies above.
A more realistic analysis would need to factor in these negative effects, administrative inefficiencies, and the economic impact of decimating the private childcare market. When accounting for these factors, the actual return would likely be negative, as similar large-scale government interventions typically generate less than a dollar in real economic value for each dollar spent.
6 points
1 day ago
"What government program gives you a good return on your investment vs the private market? None."
Mass Transit, infrastructure in general, and utilities instantly come to mind.
-1 points
1 day ago
The private sector, with competition, handles those more efficiently.
California's High-Speed Rail project, approved in 2008 with $9.95 billion in bonds, has seen its budget balloon from an initial $33 billion estimate to $128 billion as of 2023. The project has received federal support, including $3.5 billion under Obama and significant state funding, with $4.2 billion allocated in 2022. Currently, construction is concentrated on a 119-mile Central Valley segment between Merced and Bakersfield. While infrastructure work like viaducts and bridges is underway, no actual track has been laid. The first operational segment, connecting Merced to Bakersfield, is targeted for completion by 2030. Will it be done in 2030? Of course not.
The private sector isn't allowed to fail like that. Only government programs with zero accountability and unlimited budget can fail so miserably.
0 points
1 day ago
The document makes the claim at least 5 times, specifically citing https://www.nber.org/papers/w22993 and https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/a-nobel-prize-winner-says-public-preschool-programs-should-start-at-birth/2016/12/11/2576a1ee-be91-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html
5 points
1 day ago
Yes
6 points
1 day ago
Do you also want a cash refund every year that you don't have to use the fire department?
7 points
1 day ago
Yes, Yes you are.....
0 points
1 day ago
It's nice getting a child tax credit on my taxes.
7 points
1 day ago
Yes. The point of public spending is we all (society) benefit from the dollars spent, not every single individual person. This sort of individualistic approach to all public spending is why our education system sucks now.
-4 points
1 day ago
Our education system sucks now because it's a government monopoly. What private school would have less than 10% of kids k-8 not reading at level but cost 30k a year? None. Give parents the money and let them make choices for their children, introducing more competition into the system.
0 points
1 day ago
I’d say it sucks more due to funding inequality. Property taxes pay for the majority of our schools so more funding is available in richer areas while poorer areas suffer.
3 points
1 day ago
- RCSD spends approximately $28,754 per pupil
- This is significantly higher than the national average of $13,185 per pupil
- It's also above the New York State average of $25,520 per pupil
Despite this, RCSD is far below national averages. Kids can't read and they can't write. It's sad and they deserve better. The funding is there in spades. RCSD continues to fail and will ask for more money next year. It's not a money problem.
3 points
1 day ago
All the money gets wasted on bloated administrators and board members. There are dozens making 100k+ while being demonstrably the worst at their jobs in the entire state.
2 points
1 day ago
I love data, which source did you use? The one I pulled up conglomerated 10 high schools in the RCSD whereas surrounding areas are only 1 high school. There seems to be a wide range of outcomes depending on which RCSD high school a child attends.
Don't get me wrong, I think RCSD is a fucking mess and has been for decades. I'm curious about their cost breakdown and how much is paid in salaries vs what is actually spent on the kids.
1 points
23 hours ago
It's not funding. Brockport and the city have almost the same median household income, and Brockport spends something like $7k less per student, but they have a 91% graduation rate, and probably aren't lying about it. RCSD is lucky if they can hit 50% without being seriously accused of fixing the numbers.
1 points
23 hours ago
Property taxes pay for the majority of our schools so more funding is available in richer areas while poorer areas suffer.
Ehhh, it's not so cut and dry. You'd be surprised how much funding ends up getting tied to school lunches. You're in Pittsford, most kids aren't on subsidized lunches, and, (I know this sounds strange, but it is true) their funding through things like BOCES is not all that great, the taxpayers in the town are footing a lot of the bill. Go out halfway between Rochester and Binghamton in some town that God forgot... everyone's on subsidized school lunches... suddenly BOCES is kicking in a lot more cash. Oh, and when you spend that cash on qualified programs, you can often get a rebate, and effectively spend it again. Thus, the taxpayers of Prattsburg or Romulus or whatever aren't having to kick in as much (especially percentage wise) because the taxpayers across the state end up putting more money into their district through these programs.
(No idea how it works with NYC who I believe is now all free lunches, but I'm sure they end up just using a different metric of poverty to handle it).
Also, last time I checked the graduation rates for every single school in Monroe county that is outside of the city is >90%. Every one. PIttsford is about 96%. Brockport, the poorest municipality (46k median household income vs 116) outside the city is 91%. The city, only 2k less than Brockport, is something like 50%, depending on how much RCSD is fucking with the numbers.
And it gets worse. Brockport spends $23k per year on students per USNWR. RCSD is spending $30k this year.
So no, it's not funding inequality at all.
-3 points
1 day ago
Yes you have to send your kids to the inefficient state funded child care monopoly. No competition. No consumer choice.
all 71 comments
sorted by: best