29

Could you raise a child on $3,000 a year?


 


 
Filed under:

Could you raise a child on $3,000 a year?

  1. What universe are these people at the Fraser live on. I take it none of them have raised a child. Morons !

    • We are constantly fed so much BS about costs of being Canadian it isn’t funny. I don’t know who cooks this up, but it is all to deceive us.

      For example is that $3000 before or after taxes? What about hidden taxes that drive up costs of diapers and cloths?

      I could easily raise a child for $3000 tax paid money, but not in price inflated Canada.

  2. what have you been smoking???

  3. Once in a blue moon I agree with the Fraser Institute, oh wait, it is a month of a blue moon, I guess it blew that concept.

    • Fraser Institute has lost it. I was once a supporter but now they have turned against the people with deception and lies like this one.

      I looked at their tax free day and realized they were full of it. Your tax free day for all wage earners is closer to August….as I also included hidden taxation.

      For example, I earn $100, I then pay $40 in income/employment taxes, $10 to property/utility taxes, to get $50 of gas with 40% or more taxes. So for $100 of wages I get $30 of gas and government gets 70% in one order of income/spend.

      Works the same way for clothing. I earn $100, I then pay $40 in income/employment taxes, $10 to property/utility taxes, to get a jacket that has $25 of tariffs, duties, excise and fees for a $25 imported jacket. Government gets $75 and I get a $25 jacket or shoes.

      People have no clue how tax inflated our economy has become. Fraser Institute is now a puppet of the Ottawa deception and ruse. Just like CBC, feed the propaganda.

  4. Well, assuming $200.00 a month on food per person adds up to $400.00 per month on average, or $4800.00 per year for ONE parent and ONE child…then there’s rent, heat, light, phone, car, insurance, fuel, clothing…for starters.

    Obviously, this is a government-inspired question, written by people who think “Ya know…those stupid scumbags who pay my ever-increasing salary don’t deserve more than 3 grand a year to live on…let’s find a way to justify taking more from them…”

    • they are just trying to justify anyone on welfare or EI getting next to nothing! not even enough money to both pay the rent and feed themselves!

      • You have to understand the way that government has changed, while we have consistently REFUSED to reign in OUR EMPLOYEES.

        Governments are no longer “service providers for the people” at all. That stopped when governments began incorporating, and converting themselves into revenue-generating industries…and we still don’t care to look at that fact at all.

        What USED TO be people-created, people-oriented, people-serving institutions have become little more than a new class of “elitists” whose primary motive is the same as any other corporation: More for themselves, and less for all of us…while we pay ever increasing amounts for the lesser and lesser benefits of our elected criminal leeches on society.

        Until we admit what this world has become, we will never change anything for the better.

        It’s gone from good to bad, from bad to worse, and from worse to worst. All in a single generation, and we STILL don’t care about anything enough to do anything to stop it, or even to slow it down.

        I don’t see people waking up any time soon. They just “can’t be bothered.”

      • Welfare or EI? What about vets and disabled who get the double shaft and are not able to get a job?

        Even Canada’s social safety net is a flipping ruse. Lets hope you don’t have to find out.

        I am disabled, but since I saved and invested in years I could work, I didn’t depend on government, I get to keep my home and not be homeless.

        • dave777 – I am in the same boat! I’m now disabled too. I recently tried out for a provincial job that according to HR I was more than qualified for ~ however the manager interviewing had already decided she was promoting within (receptionist to the job) so was looking for someone to fill her job, which she felt I wasn’t qualified for. Whole thing was a waste of my time and the gov’t money for advertising the job provincially 95 people applying, interviewing 10 of us, for the manager to hire within?
          I’ve barely hung onto my house even with a caseworker’s help in various things. I have to run electric heat as I can’t afford oil to fill the tank anymore or even the furnace to have a tune up. Car needs work, how that’s going to get done I have no idea? As right now once bills are done I have about $100 to buy food, gas, clothes, pet food, etc.
          What does this have to do with the topic? I’m just glad my sons were grown and gone off onto their own lives as I certainly couldn’t afford to feed them let alone anything else!

          • Disabled, then you know this as true. You would be better off on welfare, or immigration assistance than you CPP/disability. You faced a real inflation rate of 5%, got a 1% disability raise at most, all for a lousy $12k a year from Ottawa.

            The taxes I paid before disabled, just the 1% interest supersedes the payout. And government has a pretty bad record to hiring disabled.

            My point being that able people get more social dollars per person than disabled people do. Or social safety net is skewed towards noisy able groups and discards the disabled voice. Even CNIB discourages their clients from social interaction as out of sight, out of mind.

            But taxing people more isn’t the answer. I was successful in dealing with my disability for 37 years of work, so I have seen both sides of the coin. I remember the days when I was in the early 20s and taxes held me back to get a economical start, ditto again with kids, ditto again in post kids. This story above is just a political ploy.

            But no shortage of money for bombs and defective F35s and rusty subs.

          • You get a 1% raise on disability in Ontario? Wow, that’s lucky, they haven’t raised it in over 10 years here in B.C.

          • I hurt my back at work and run out of wcb and ei. had to apply for welfare at the age of 58. they made me take a class for a week, that hurt my back even more, then told me I wasn’t eligible, even for a drug or dental card because I occasionally babysat for the people I was living with, yet gave the 18 year old kid, living at home with his mommy a cheque. now I’m looking after my mom with dementia, living off her OAP and CPP and I’m still not eligible for ANY help. Can you imagine what they’d tell a single mother over the age of 30 in the same position oh, and I’m not injured enough for disability.

      • Its worse than that. Take a working couple, their efforts taxed so much they delay or don’t have as many kids. Young get late starts with student debt as part time jobs for students have dried up as most don’t have their money, it went to the expensive governemtn children.

        Average of less than 1.5 babies per family means immigration has to allow 1 in 4 lose immigration policy just to come close to maintaining population. To maintain population you need 2.1 babies per family. (added .1 is for premature deaths,war casualties, car accidents etc).

        It an expensive economy, price inflated good from hyper taxation in hidden taxes, it isn’t just income/employment taxes slamming the incomes, it also gets slammed again on the spend side. Its why more and more shop USA.

        Say I want a winter jacket, shoes or even a RC Helicopter toy, I can shop USA and get them for half prices as it doesn’t have hidden taxes in it, CBSA collects $40 billion in hidden taxes and protectionism every year, GST/HST/Prov extra.

        People are not having kids as the afford-ability isn’t there in a tax inflated economy of government bloat. Too much non-value added consumption, and not enough for producers. Government must cut its non-value added consumption for any real recovery to occur.

  5. It sounds like cuts might be coming somewhere, such nonsense! I suppose it could be done if you eliminate clothing, school supplies, extra coricular activities, entertainment, oh wait! Isn’t that neglect?

    • Cuts? The Canadian government wrote another statute which allows them to take up to 90% of ALL of our savings, just like was done in Cyprus…and NOBODY EVEN CARES. That’s not “cuts”, that’s outright, BLATANT, wholesale theft, and there’s no way to “justify it politically.”

      I wonder if people will “start to consider the potential option of thinking about possibly worrying about caring at some point…maybe…if it fits into my entertainment schedule…” once the REAL economic crisis finally hits home?

      • Yep, and a tax called transaction tax. It is why Ottawa has pushed the BS about offshore accounts. Most people who go offshore are honest and for the 105 or so Lichtenstein super-rich they have money to buy politicians off. Only real explanation for CRA letting them off so lightly.

        As if your money is offshore, not only are earnings better, if Ottawa gets more greedy you can move out and no longer have to declare world wide income to Ottawa.

        We are planning that now.

    • and other school fees. my kids and their friends are paying upwards of 500 per child in school fees

  6. Of course you can raise a child on $3,000 a year … IF you make your own clothes, spin your own wool, grow your own food, live in the country where taxes are low, don’t need any day care or baby sitters, and the child lives very rural or sequestered so that they cannot see or experience how other children: a) dress, b) eat, c) what they have to play with, d) what other families own: computer, television, dvd player and movies, games, etc, abd e) how they holiday or the equipment they have for hockey or other sports or the musical instruments etc.
    In other words if you raise your child away from the average town or city it can be done and said child can be happy while you are doing it.

    • Or raise them in Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama, Brazil, Peru, Chile…..

      Then $3000 is good. But not in Canada. Canada are taxed too much supporting the expensive children in government play acting self important politics. Ever watch CPAC? What a joke.

  7. Answer is no. If you can you probably need a visit from child services to remove the child from your care.

    Canada is a super price inflated place to live. Mostly from taxes our cost of basic living is a lot more than people realize. Have you factored in the costs of a larger home, utility and property taxes? Lost wages as someone staying at home? While we eat well, I know what we spend on groceries for two, and $3000 just might cover the food, but not adding clothing, gas for doctors visits, school fees, added utility/housing costs, toys, education materials and more.

    But I could easily raise a child well for $3000, just not in Canada. I would have to move to Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama, Brazil, Chile or some place where costs are not inflated from taxation. Did you know cotton diapers have tariffs on them as do others if not USA made? With cotton diapers you also need to factor in new washers and dryers….

    Sorry, $3000 in Canada isn’t doable. Not if you do the math right.

  8. I think many Canadians raise children on $3000.00 a year.
    By spending within one’s means and some sacrifices coupled with priorities and intelligent purchases this is very achievable.
    In most cases the child would probably learn the value of a dollar and carry this into adulthood where the national debt/income ratio is over 160% at this time which shows how poorly disciplined Canadians are.
    $3000.00 is a good number.

    • do you HAVE kids?

  9. My child is just entering University. Fees are $5,000 P.A. plus residency is $9000.00 plus her pocketmoney, books ($1200.00) etc. I plan around 18,000.00 P.A. for the next 3/4 years.

  10. The study ignored childcare costs on the premise that in “two-couple” families, many families do not incur childcare costs. Aside from the fact that this ignores the reality of working couples and single parents, it does not include the “opportunity cost” of a person withdrawing from the workforce for a number of years, while raising a child. It is premised on the outdated 1950s model that a couple, having already acquired adequate housing, can have a child and the wife stays at home (since she wouldn’t be working anyway). It excludes costs for sports and extra-curricular activities. It does not seem to include start-up costs (stroller, crib, child seat, diaper bag).

  11. Anyone who claims they can raise a child on $3,000 per year is lying.

  12. Personally, I hope the Fraser Institute keeps on putting out more reports like this. Then maybe people will finally get the message and stop paying attention to them altogether. I’ll be satisfied when Macleans and talk radio start saying, “Fraser Institute who?”.

  13. can’t even clothe a child on that much any more!

Sign in to comment.