Day Care
Child Psychology & Adult Economics
Edited by Bryce Christensen
©1989,
Discussion, "The Economics of Day Care”,
p139
|
Rector*
complained that according to the peculiar logic of Washington, the failure
of public schools simply means that educators need to start working on the
children earlier.
(Macdonald) recalled challenging a representative of the public schools who
had (advocated) schooling for younger children at the same time that he
catalogued the many serious problems the schools now face.
*policy analyst for The Heritage Foundation
Category = Economics, Politics |
Day Care
Child Psychology & Adult Economics
Edited by Bryce Christensen
©1989,
Discussion, "The Economics of Day Care”,
p141 |
(Rector noted) Only the politics of self-interest explains why the advocates
of (pro-daycare legislation) complain that parents who receive a special tax
credit (instead) might not spend it on day care. In fact, many poor families
do have an infinite number of higher priorities than day care on their
minds. Because advocates of day care would rather not acknowledge such
preferences, they constantly ignore the traditional (lower income) families.
Not only would this group of families not receive any assistance under (such
legislation), but they would pay significant taxes, while still supporting a
family on one income.
Category = Economics, Politics |
Day Care
Child Psychology & Adult Economics
Edited by Bryce Christensen
©1989,
Discussion, "The Economics of Day Care”,
p145 |
Rector
saw day-care advocates trying to forge an unholy alliance with business.
Advocates of (pro-daycare legislation) have tried to win over business
groups by arguing that they can keep wages down...only if they can bring
more mothers of infants into the workforce, while their children go into
tax-subsidized day-care centers. For ostensibly left-wing groups to use this
line of logic constituted extraordinary hypocrisy, even for Washington,
Rector observed.
Category = Economics, Politics |
|
Day Care
Child Psychology & Adult Economics
Edited by Bryce Christensen
©1989,
Discussion, "The Economics of Day Care”,
p131 |
Deborah
Walker* (noted...)
...the first group to benefit from passage of (pro-daycare legislation)
would be state officials. Hence, the motive for governors and other state
politicians pushing for (such) measure(s).
*assistant professor of economics at Loyola University (New Orleans, LA)
Category = Politics |
Day Care
Child Psychology & Adult Economics
Edited by Bryce Christensen
©1989,
Discussion, "The Economics of Day Care”,
p131 |
The
second group Deborah Walker saw lobbying for (pro-daycare legislation) were
representatives of educational agencies. As public agencies that see their
budgets grow under (such legislation), such groups naturally rally to its
support.
(Also) credentialed experts have an economic motive for supporting (this
legislation). It is much easier to sell expert opinion to government
institutions or to government-regulated institutions than it is to sell it
on the open market.
Category = Economics, Politics |
