People would always ask my father what was the difference between a tailor made suit and one off the rack with the former being substantially more expensive.
There's no real way to convince someone who would ask the question to begin with. Sure, some would be swayed but as a whole, in life, there are some who just don't care with one off the rack being good enough.
It's called free choice as I usually say here.
I thought about that after someone (a high income earner at that) asked my wife, what's different between your service at the cost you charge and the public one?
There's a world of difference. Like how a tailor made suit is specifically designed to your body, so is a private daycare best suited for a child given the ability to be flexible and attention to details that can't possibly be met on the public side. Less bureaucratic and more agile too.
These are just general examples. It simply comes down to values.
Around here, we're private oriented me and my wife despite she being in public education. Life is funny that way.
It all comes down to this: How much people are willing to put down for it.
***
My prices are extremely cheap all things considered. But next to subsidized daycare, I come off looking like a pirate despite tax credits (up to 55%) offered to clients by the government. We're so conditioned to believe paying for things - especially those deemed "essential services" - is a bad thing, any price in the private market, however accurate or more realistic, seems outrageous.
Yet nothing comes for free. After all we pay for all these things through our taxes - often inefficiently. The question is, would you prefer to control your cash flow for services selected, or do you prefer to have no control and leave your earned income in the hands of the state to provide those same services.
I know what I'd prefer.
I guess I see your problem: middle income people can not afford your services and rich kids have nannies at home.
ReplyDeleteWith the current inflation rates, anyway, only the very well off can keep spending. All the others, we have to bu medicine?
"middle income people can not afford your services and rich kids have nannies at home."
ReplyDeleteThey can afford it. That's what I've been trying to explain. They end up paying as ow as $17 a day for a PRIVATE service I regard to be be than the public service. That's $10 more than a public service. If our middle class can't absorb that then we have a serious cash flow problem in this province because it ain't that much for a service that's a reality now. People should be budgeting for it by the time they get married.
'Rich kids with nannies' sounds like one of those "liberal" things to say. As it stands, rich kids end up in CPE's taking the spots of lower income kids who are really screwed. I have friends who earn high incomes, have nannies and use CPE's and it drives me and my wife nuts. It's plain not right in theoy but guess what? THEY PAY FOR IT TOO! It's a double edged sword. You need taxes from the rich to give this service to the poor.
Theoretically, it's society's problem. That's my point: $7 a day, while "accessilbe to all" is more expensive to run for taxpayers than simply letting private people like me with personal money willing to risk to run them. It's the same supply problem at ridiculous costs we see in public health.
With regards to the "pay first and collect the tax credit" mentality, yes, it makes our job harder. Like I said, here we're taught to believe paying for something is bad. It's like the Catholic church from 1885 never died.
I don't even know what "middle-class" incomes are anymore but people across North America seem to make it happen at 1 1/2 to double the prices and usually without a tax credit - more likely deductible on income.
In the end, parents end up paying anywhere between $450 and $650 for full-time spots here as opposed to the $120 they pay in a CPE - although this figure doesn't factor in extra fees and charges. So let's say $150.
But as I said, that $500 difference is being paid by taxes anyway so if anything, parents are paying the CPE fee PLUS the costs to run them (something like $45 to $50) through their taxes (except the poor of course).
You get what you pay for in the final analysis and what's left of whatever this thing the 'free market' lays this fact out crystal clear no matter the egalitarian perspective.
Personally, I've always been a tailored made suit kinda guy. I wore a suit off the rack once and it was the worst day of my life.
I get your point, T.C.; I sympathize with your plea but we live in a society that does not buy that argument. Is it bad, is it good? Our people, so far, have chosen the social-democratic path (I'm one of them as you know) and that society choice is valid and to be respected. Our liberty, thank God, allows anyone to fight it but also prevents anyone to shove the alternative down our throats until a majority pronounces for it.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the current slide to the right and the arrival in retirement of well off boomers, your victory may not be all that far. I'll then go to the poor house and public assistance hospitals as it was 60 years ago.
Tyranny of the majority!
ReplyDeleteJust because it happened 60 years ago doesn't mean it will repeat.
All I'm asking for is meaningful reform and accountability, Paul. I also suggest we adjust our dated collectivist attitudes. We can achieve better without coercive paternalistic policies. I'm sorry. I just don't think it's right the strangle hold the state has on education and health.
I also would treat this doomsday approach that if Legault and his side "wins" our society will fall apart. Some may argue it was all paid for by debt anyway.
Alas, it's not about "victory" but fixing things. One way is to once and for all be gone with the top-bottom approach where bureaucrats determine a helluva lot more than we bargained and voted for.