D is an imbecile, BUT I don’t think he’s entirely off of base here. Grandparents (and other extended family members) have historically been very involved in the raising of young children.
First, my children are not my parents’, siblings’, or friends’ responsibility. Just like their kids aren’t mine.
Second, in an age where people are continuing to work even beyond retirement (either by choice or need), these people all likely have work and family responsibilities of their own. And even if they don’t, what if they simply just don’t want the burden of taking your child for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I know plenty of grandparents who like the idea of the kids coming by on the weekend where they can load them up with sugar and send them home, and who’s opinion is that of “Hey, I raised my kids. My job is done. It’s your turn now.”, and do not want the day-to-day responsibilites of child care.
What about those who have no family? Maybe their parents have died. Or maybe they’re too old to keep up with the day to day responsibilites? Or your family are simply not the type of people you want your children to be around? What if they live too far away to make childcare a viable option?
Are they also supposed to be responsible for feeding and transporting your child around (to and from school, for example) for free?
Your position just defends the GOP take on the matter that poor people should just rely on these resources as if they’re available to everybody without issues, and that family members are all well-adjusted members of society who will gladly essentially take on the full time job of child care worker for free because they have no responsibilities of their own. Look at it this way. If these people have parents, siblings, and friends available to them and they’re not using them for child care, there’s probably a reason for that. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee you they looked into it.
First, my children are not my parents’, siblings’, or friends’ responsibility. Just like their kids aren’t mine.
Second, in an age where people are continuing to work even beyond retirement (either by choice or need), these people all likely have work and family responsibilities of their own. And even if they don’t, what if they simply just don’t want the burden of taking your child for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I know plenty of grandparents who like the idea of the kids coming by on the weekend where they can load them up with sugar and send them home, and who’s opinion is that of “Hey, I raised my kids. My job is done. It’s your turn now.”, and do not want the day-to-day responsibilites of child care.
What about those who have no family? Maybe their parents have died. Or maybe they’re too old to keep up with the day to day responsibilites? Or your family are simply not the type of people you want your children to be around? What if they live too far away to make childcare a viable option?
Are they also supposed to be responsible for feeding and transporting your child around (to and from school, for example) for free?
Your position just defends the GOP take on the matter that poor people should just rely on these resources as if they’re available to everybody without issues, and that family members are all well-adjusted members of society who will gladly essentially take on the full time job of child care worker for free because they have no responsibilities of their own. Look at it this way. If these people have parents, siblings, and friends available to them and they’re not using them for child care, there’s probably a reason for that. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee you they looked into it.