5 Comments

"We have a few small programs like Head Start and school-based pre-K, but again, we spend about nine times more per child per year in K-12 than in early childhood."

We just need a generous CTC, larger for younger children that require more care, even as we work to remove obstacles to the supply of child care. Public provision should be seen as creating best practice.

Expand full comment
author

A CTC is one way to go but it is different. This paper estimates that, per $, opening access to high-quality care is estimated to have a 5X bigger impact on child cognitive skill development than a cash transfer. High quality care subsidy puts the $ into the child's development; cash boosts parent well being more though as they have more discretion over how to use it.

https://hceconomics.uchicago.edu/research/working-paper/early-childhood-care-and-cognitive-development

Expand full comment

"To be able to provide what is a very labor-intensive product, you have to have the caregivers, the early childhood teachers, and there are regulations around how many adults per child, especially for very young children. That's not going to change."

Don't give up so quickly on this or removing other obstacles to provision of child care.

Expand full comment

"I think a lot of people think of the lack of available affordable childcare as a byproduct of market failure."

It is a byproduct of the highest need coinciding with a period of low income. We should have a VAT financed transfer for this just as we should for old age, sickness or unemployment.

https://thomaslhutcheson.substack.com/p/socia-insurance-20

Expand full comment

"but had to abandon"

No, Biden did not "have" to abandon the CTC. It was an unforced error.

Expand full comment