The Democrats are so out of touch with mainstream America it's almost a joke, and not a very funny one at that......

Democrat Senator Says People Don’t Care About Gas Prices If They Can’t Afford Child Care So They Can Go to Work

Democrat Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii made an alarming statement while appearing on a broadcast of MSNBC’s “Velshi”.

Hirono saiod she agrees with the notion that people don’t care about gas prices if they can’t afford child care so they can work.

https://www.analyzingamerica.org/2021/11...Smw7EdwR0E

---

Childcare is usually a bigger expense than gas.
People should care more about the cost of childcare than gas, but they don't.
People see gas prices posted in big numbers ten times a day, at least.
If daycares posted their weekly rates like that, people might care more.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

---

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

My wife stays home to rear the children. We're fortunate that our tastes allow us to live on a budget of my salary, but we also gave up things that we had to in order make it work (like our Jags tickets). In a society designed to squeeze every dollar your earn right out of your wallet that's a very difficult thing to accomplish. We also have this idea in our society that it's not fair if a recent high school grad can't afford a new car and 1,000 sq foot apartment on his or her own. Previous generations struggled for those things, but now it seems an entitlement.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Childcare is usually a bigger expense than gas.
People should care more about the cost of childcare than gas, but they don't.
People see gas prices posted in big numbers ten times a day, at least.
If daycares posted their weekly rates like that, people might care more.

A small minority has a need for childcare. Almost everyone has the need for fuel be it to drive a vehicle or heat their homes.

---

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

Stayed home when my boy was little, don’t regret it for a minute. We didn’t want someone else spending more time with our child than we did.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

No, they would consider it misogynistic and patriarchal.

---

Shouldn't cost of childcare go up because you have to pay a living wage to everyone?

How about we fix all the other problems created by liberals so a parent can actually stay home and raise the kids. Then you don't have to pay for daycare and the kids will be better off, neighborhoods and communities will be better, etc. That's probably racists though because the liberals destroyed the family structure of poor people.

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

It is all starting to make sense.

---

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

Too many parents feel that way, the kids get in the way of their freedom and life. Look at schools and people using them as babysitters so they don't have to watch their kids. It's terrible because the kids end up without an education, discipline, and end up repeating the same mistakes that their parent(s) made so they continue the cycle and never get out. Not everyone is willing to make someone else their whole life and unfortunately those people also can't be bothered to ensure they don't create a life.

---

Most parents don't want to stay home with their kids. The economy is more productive when more people work outside of the home.
In a more productive economy, more people can afford to live the lifestyle they choose, whether that means staying home with their kids or going out and working.
I don't think anybody can dispute these facts.
Perhaps in the late sixties, most mothers preferred to stay home, but that is not the case today.
The only question is whether or not more subsidies for daycare will create a virtuous cycle of more workers and more productivity, or if it will simply inflate the cost of the things subsidized, as most subsidies do.
Considering the daycares are looking at the same labor shortages as everybody else, even though most of them offer free or reduced cost care for the children of their own workers, new subsidies for daycares at this point are unlikely to do any good, and likely to do harm.
Considering the actual strains that families today face, especially considering that almost all abortions are performed on women who are actively raising children already, a much better policy would be continuing and even expanding the new child tax credit, and let the families decide what to do with the money.

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/267737/reco...aking.aspx

---

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

Stayed home when my boy was little, don’t regret it for a minute. We didn’t want someone else spending more time with our child than we did.

Good for you. I've heard that from a lot of people.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Can you back up the part in bold?  Because I know that my wife and I preferred for her to be home with our children.  Also, we never used daycare, at the very most we hired a babysitter on occasion.  Our children were our responsibility, not anyone else's.

I think that the "lifestyle" that far too many people want and pursue is high speed internet, the latest and greatest smart phones for everyone in the home and late model automobiles.  Rather than sweep the floor or monitor the washing machine they want a "robot" to do it for them and a "smart app" to tell them that the washing machine is done with their clothes.

As far as gas prices or fuel prices in general, it impacts a lot of people particularly those in rural communities and in mid-america.  For us personally we have to make a 15 mile trip just to get to a grocery store and a much longer trip to get to other stores.  We require diesel fuel to run the tractors that we use on our farm.  That impacts the little bit of income we make from our small operation.  Expand that to farmers in Iowa, Kansas, etc. who travel miles just to get from one field to another.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/267737/reco...aking.aspx

---

Mike shoots....Mike scores!!!!!

---

I was wanting to reply to gas prices and cost of child care and the reasons we had to put our daughter in daycare and such. But that turned into a book. A book that concluded pretty well. And I’ve never been the guy to save 1.20 driving an extra few miles to fill my tank up. I will say I’m not a day care advocate. But the one my daughter went to was damn good. I thought they just made sure your kids didn’t choke and such while you worked. I didn’t know they taught them sign language, reading, alphabet, numbers and etc. I will say they taught her more than I would have that about teaching her at the stages she was in. The cost was just about as much as our mortgage. A cost that almost ended my company. But without delving into my wife’s and I background, I’ll just say it was a catalyst for me to make some changes at work. Since I won’t go into detail and write a book, I’ll add this:

---

https://news.gallup.com/poll/267737/reco...aking.aspx

---

Mike shoots....Mike scores!!!!!

Way to go! Maybe one day you’ll shoot and score! If you’re going to live vicariously through someone, not sure that’s the guy I’d choose.  But keep trying, Bud.  
I have faith  in you

---

42 bucks under Trump to fill her up, well over 80 now with no end in sight in the short term. Yeah, I don’t care

---

Your beliefs become your thoughts,
Your thoughts become your words,
Your words become your actions,
Your actions become your habits,
Your habits become your values,
Your values become your destiny.

$3.19 up to $3.35 today between 8am and 6pm.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

50% of women with children under age 18 prefer to stay home; 45%, to work

That's the only stat that matters from that poll. Who cares what women think if about staying home with the kids when they don't even have them yet. Furthermore, that stat is skewed by making it from 0-18. I'd love to just look at the numbers for kids under 5. I bet is skews heavily in favor of staying home. Funny how that works.

Here's another pew poll that shows that it's actually a vast minority of women who want to work full time while they have kids. 

---

50% of women with children under age 18 prefer to stay home; 45%, to work

That's the only stat that matters from that poll. Who cares what women think if about staying home with the kids when they don't even have them yet. Furthermore, that stat is skewed by making it from 0-18. I'd love to just look at the numbers for kids under 5. I bet is skews heavily in favor of staying home. Funny how that works.

Here's another pew poll that shows that it's actually a vast minority of women who want to work full time while they have kids. 

You still need childcare if you work part time.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Can't afford to care for your child? Don't have a damn kid then you broke as a joke [BLEEP].

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

50% of women with children under age 18 prefer to stay home; 45%, to work

That's the only stat that matters from that poll. Who cares what women think if about staying home with the kids when they don't even have them yet. Furthermore, that stat is skewed by making it from 0-18. I'd love to just look at the numbers for kids under 5. I bet is skews heavily in favor of staying home. Funny how that works.

Here's another pew poll that shows that it's actually a vast minority of women who want to work full time while they have kids. 

You still need childcare if you work part time.

Not necessarily, you could work opposite hours of your partner.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???