Childcare costs up to £15000 a year

Doodledog

I would support a grant being given to all parents to spend on nursery fees or on boosting their income so they can afford to stay at home if they wish. It could be paid as a tax break, so that all parents of young children pay no income tax for the first five years whether they work or SAH? That would be fair to everyone.

I'd support that ^^ as well. I believe some parents belong at home and if income tax breaks help - fine by me.

Doodledog And yes, there are taxes other than income tax, but they are additional to the ones paid by those who work, and paid out of the remaining family budget (ie the after-tax income of the members of the family who do work). It is not being disingenuous to suggest that those paying taxes should be the ones to benefit from tax breaks. In fact it is far more so to say that someone not paying income tax should get the same childcare tax breaks as those who do pay, based on their paying VAT when they spend the money someone else has paid tax on.

I see this a different way. The average income of 22-39 year olds seems to be £26-32k. That being said the 2 income family is likely in the 20% tax rate. People choosing to have a sahp are likely to be paying the same 20% to 45% on their total family income - they are paying taxes. It is disingenuous to say a one income family is not paying their fair share of taxes on income earned. Apart from being critical of the choices of others, it's illogical.

Do people think I should have stayed at home?

Not if that didn't work for you or your family. As a single parent I had to work with my first two but was lucky enough to be able to stay at home for the last one. However, given the choice, I'd have stayed at home more if I could have. Things are different these days but when my free childcare stopped suddenly, I and to leave my work because there was no help from the Government and I didn't earn enough to have care for 2 children, one who was under two. I did limp on for a while but it was with Child Minders, both in their home and in mine. It was an awful experience and so I lived on benefits for a while. I'd sooner be poor than take a risk with my children.
There are lots of benefits with nurseries but very small children can spend a long, long time in them if both parents are working full time and I know that my grandson barely saw his parents from 9 months onwards until the Pandemic when they worked from home. That is when they realised how much they weren't able to do and just how much they didn't see regarding the behaviours of their own child. It was an eye opener and made them realise that they had to have more access to their child rather than getting home from work, exhausted and putting their child to bed. Weekends were spent getting ready for the next working week and doing shopping etc.
I am not criticising anybody who finds they have to work, I just think help should be balanced to allow parents to parent should they want to.

I see this a different way. The average income of 22-39 year olds seems to be £26-32k. That being said the 2 income family is likely in the 20% tax rate. People choosing to have a sahp are likely to be paying the same 20% to 45% on their total family income - they are paying taxes. It is disingenuous to say a one income family is not paying their fair share of taxes on income earned. Apart from being critical of the choices of others, it's illogical.

Norah, we are never going to agree on this, which is fine - it is an opinion, not one of those things that can be proved to be right or wrong.

IMO, everyone who is able to is responsible for paying their own way, and the fact that one family member pays a lot of tax is neither here nor there - their tax bill is their obligation, and doesn't cover anybody else's. If I earned a million pounds a year, my tax bill would be high, but that would be because I owed a lot to society, and it would be illogical to say that I could buy others out of their responsibilities.

What's the point of having earnings-related taxation if one person can pay for two or more? We might just as well have a poll tax which is the same for everyone and can be paid by a Head Of Household. IMO, the current system of tax being related to earnings is a lot fairer. In fact, I think it could go a lot further and be a lot fairer than it is, but it's just that - my opinion. Disagree by all means, but I'm not being disingenuous. It's just what I happen to think.

As I keep saying, it's not the main point of my argument, which is that childcare should be subsidised with no cut-off for those who earn more than a basic salary. It wouldn't have to be nursery - childcare could be a nanny, or childminder (a granny or a professional), an after-school youth club or combinations of all.

Doodledog Norah, we are never going to agree on this, which is fine - it is an opinion, not one of those things that can be proved to be right or wrong.

IMO, everyone who is able to is responsible for paying their own way, and the fact that one family member pays a lot of tax is neither here nor there - their tax bill is their obligation, and doesn't cover anybody else's.

Indeed, we'll never agree on this topic. Nice we have no need. IMO married people are a unit/team - money is shared as are obligations.