Here's an : how about everybody pays for their own stuff and then nobody has to worry about anybody else?



Everybody complains about the UK nanny state but a Swiss nanny state is ok?

:nonexistent-pot-stirring-smiley

As I said (in my post that somehow got posted in triplicate and subsequently deleted), I'd rather see more affordable daycare and after-school care, but I highly doubt it will happen.

The money for this measure will have to come out of somewhere, such as higher premiums for adults.

AFAIK the child allowance it's not tax free. It's added to the salary and then taxed.

I agree that it doesn't even cover the cost of the pampers.

Er, is this a stab at humour?

don't forget kinderkrippe (day care) costs. The money we spend per month on nano-nic being in daycare could put him through an elite US university. This is abso-farking-lutely ridiculous.

If the government would release its stranglehold on the number of kinderkrippe licences and encourage true competition, working parents here would be a lot happier.


and, re: the exemption of children from healthcare.... excellent! makes sense to me.

No one has children for the benefit of society. And not every single person is single and not a parent by choice.

With this system a struggling single person subsidizes even rich people's children and I don't think this is fair at all.

Well, I guess you (as in both parents combined) make enough money to justify the daycare expenses, otherwise you would probably have chosen a different option, wouldn't you?

AFAIK there's no stranglehold on licenses but just tons of rules, regulations and requirements driving up costs and making it difficult and expensive for childcare providers to enter the market.

Taking into account that there is already tax adventage for not married (vs married couple taxed at higher basket) I'd advise first to look that and level at least married with unmarried in tax . Than we can start whenever health costs for kids should be free or not .. or maybe you want your kids to grow in 'split' family and expect them to create stable family once they are adult ?

I guess it's more and more seen these days where young are not ready to create stable family - as there wasn't one when they could have lernt how to.

All I can say is I support idea of free healthcare for kids + dental as it's often found in Switzerland as luxury , while I believe that free market helps much more - so idea of kinderkrippe that is not-for-profit would be great and possibly even easier to get working than tax breakes - as it was mention already.

Maybe one more notice - healthcare system is supported in about 40-50% already from tax money and all KK had to raise premiums to stay alive ..or make money ? Not sure reasons for health costs escalation but it may be very well that old age care and related expenses, drugs and smoking making system to get more and more expensive ...

That's exactly why I think it's a very bad idea. Not all people without children are rich and not all families with children are poor and I just don't see why the insurance premiums for rich peoples' children should be subsidized.

Hopefully this idea will silently die after the October elections...

Reality check please!

This isn't law yet. It still needs to pass the National Council and the State Council.

The fact that it was voted by the commission is positive momentum. But the hurdle will likely be at the State Council vote, where the members will evaluate the larger effect on the initiative on insurance companies.

Have you got more details concerning this?

That is an accompanying initiative that was endorsed by the same commission. I believe it is meant to cover students up to the age of 25 who have not yet started to earn a living.



By the way OP/Mods, the title of this thread is misleading.

most people take this option because it is the only one open to them. One salary is not enough to pay for everything, while bringing in two salaries require that the children go to day care. For those that don't have family here, there are few other options. For the record, day care, for one child, can easily be the equivalent of one months rent. With two kids, this is almost doubled. Given that an average rental is 20-25% of family income, you do the math.

also, from where i'm sitting the "tons of rules" equate to a stranglehold on licences and free competition.

Some of us have no options. I am a single income family and I'm forced to work to provide for my daughter. The daycare costs are double our rent.

It all depends how much is the ratio of the well-off with children to the so-so. Bureaucracy costs as well so sometimes less "just" but effectively cheaper sistem is better.
http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/schweiz/...story/30786039
"Ruth Humbel gibt zu bedenken, dass mit den stetigen Prämienerhöhungen der Druck steige, einen immer grösseren Teil der Bevölkerung zu subventionieren. Das heutige Prämienverbilligungssystem sei kompliziert und mit viel administrativem Aufwand verbunden. Die Prämienbefreiung für Kinder wäre wesentlich einfacher, effizienter und solidarischer."

My crude translation:
Ruth Humbel adds that with the increasing insurance premiums rises the pressure for subvention [of the insurance premiums] for ever larger part of the society. The present system of the [health insurance] premiums is complex and has a lot of administrative overhead. Eliminating the premiums for children would be significantly simpler, more efficient and supportive.

Mrs. Humbel has obviously no clue what she is talking about. Eliminating premiums for children would not make the current system of sudsidies obsolete because there are also many people without children who rely on the subsidies.

In my case, it really does mean that.

No. It was humour.