Child Care is costing us the equivelent of a mortgage!

Winky,_The_House_Elf

My DD is 8 months, and very much wanted after IVF etc.

We earn simular to the OP, and I am about to return to work. It mean I will work FT for about £450 after tax! The best laid plans, can go awry, I was going to work pt, and earn the same amount (£450), but I was counting on family help, but unfortunately my Mum had a stroke, so all hands are on deck there. I would love to be able be with my DD, but even though we have no major debts (£2k or so) we can't afford the regular bills on DH's salary.

It also rules out a sibling as there is no way we can afford £5k in costs for IVF

j.e.j.

charlieismydarling wrote: »

Name calling and pettiness towards the less fortunate is hardly going to help your cause.

Absolutely!:T

Perhaps this thread was started just as a vent. It now seems to have turned into a discussion/argument about whether or not to work or stay home with the kids..

Tropez

As someone who has no desire for children perhaps I'm missing something here but why is it that some people would prefer to have a go at "scroungers" who claim welfare than face the fact that they could, nay should, have had savings in place to cope with the child care costs until the child was able to go to school?

Lifes_Grand_Plan

Tropez wrote: »

As someone who has no desire for children perhaps I'm missing something here but why is it that some people would prefer to have a go at "scroungers" who claim welfare than face the fact that they could, nay should, have had savings in place to cope with the child care costs until the child was able to go to school?

Savings in place?!?! REALLY?!??! Childcare is not a "lifetime" upfront cost, you pay as you use so why on earth would you save up the full amount in advance?

The OP (and other parents who work) CAN afford childcare, thats not the point. The point is that people who work and in the process pay a lot of taxes, then have to pay through the nose for childcare whilst people who choose not to work - i.e. neither parent wants to work (spongers) don't need childcare so get their benefits with no childcare costs...

Tropez

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

Savings in place?!?! REALLY?!??! Childcare is not a "lifetime" upfront cost, you pay as you use so why on earth would you save up the full amount in advance?

The OP (and other parents who work) CAN afford childcare, thats not the point. The point is that people who work and in the process pay a lot of taxes, then have to pay through the nose for childcare whilst people who choose not to work - i.e. neither parent wants to work (spongers) don't need childcare so get their benefits with no childcare costs...

I don't recall saying that they should have the "full amount" in advance but is it not feasible to ensure that adequate savings are in place so that arguments like this can be avoided?

Heck, you're advised to hold six months salary in savings in the event that you lose your job. You're not told "Don't worry, lose your job and you can claim JSA soon after."

Why is child care different somehow? Why must we play the blame game? If the OP can afford child care on their salary, where's the problem?

And the tax argument is a misnomer - I don't have kids, I don't have any intention of having kids but I still pay tax and contribute to the economy.

Dynamax

Tropez wrote: »

As someone who has no desire for children perhaps I'm missing something here but why is it that some people would prefer to have a go at "scroungers" who claim welfare than face the fact that they could, nay should, have had savings in place to cope with the child care costs until the child was able to go to school?

That would mean you would have to have around £20k in place for nursery funds, based on 3 years at £620 per month. That along with a 10% deposit for a house to home the child. Really not possible, we'd still be saving forever!

Tropez I quote....'should, have had savings in place to cope with the child'.....are you suggesting means testing for future parents?

charlieismydarling

Oh I see. Another benefit bashing by Stealth thread then.

Is there any actual point to the thread at all, other than venting?

Tropez

Dynamax wrote: »

That would mean you would have to have around £20k in place for nursery funds, based on 3 years at £620 per month. That along with a 10% deposit for a house to home the child. Really not possible, we'd still be saving forever!

Tropez I quote....'should, have had savings in place to cope with the child'.....are you suggesting means testing for future parents?

You wouldn't need £20k in place although obviously the more the merrier.

For the sake of argument, lets say your child care costs for Year One amount to £7,500 and you already have that in savings so a reasonable sum would be in the region of £9,000 which allows a little leeway and gives you a headstart on Year 2. With the remaining £1,500 and supplementary income from salary during Year One you can fill up an ISA, invest in a one year, fixed rate bond, pop some money in a monthly saver perhaps (First Direct have one paying 8%) and by the end of Year One you'll be well on your way to having the savings in place for Year Two, plus a bit extra because of the money you have earned in interest which too can be reinvested.

As for means-testing parents, I never said anything of the sort. What I did say though is that if you choose to bring a child into the world then you are responsible for ensuring that the child can be looked after. Moaning about what other people are doing doesn't help your situation any, does it?

Dynamax

charlieismydarling wrote: »

Oh I see. Another benefit bashing by Stealth thread then.

Is there any actual point to the thread at all, other than venting?

I wouldn't say it was intended to be benefit bashing. It was my first post, so I guess I was just venting :mad: but it turns out they've taken a hit, oh well, I'm sure its not the only thread on here to do so!

j.e.j.

Dynamax you need to get to the root cause of all this. FORGET the "spongers" and all the other terrible,lazy etc etc people who are making life terribly unfair on the 'good' folk such as yourself:rotfl:

Are you both happy to go out to work? If so you need to pay childcare. Childcare is expensive.

I can't do better than to quote Alvin Hall: The responsibilities of parenthood are very serious and a baby is something that must be planned and saved for.

Your posts suggest you are a very resentful person, who feels hard done-by because others (in your mind) have it easy.
Your problems are NOT the fault of other people.