Adam Smith Institute

View Original

In which we disagree with Stella Creasy

Ms. Creasy wants to tell us all that we must invest in more childcare.

……but because our economy and our society won’t thrive if we don’t end the motherhood penalty that is keeping women stuck in a nightmare. Childcare is a vital part of the national infrastructure, and those failing to invest in it are the real anti-growth coalition: there can be no solution to the cost of living crisis engulfing the UK until the problem is tackled.

At which point we repeat the point we’ve made earlier. It does not grow the economy, nor in fact change anything very much, if one group of women go to work not caring for children and another group of women come into work to care for those children. Yes, more money is moved around but that’s all - we’ve still the fact that x number of children are being taken care of by y number of women.

We can replace the word “women” with “people” if we wish it still doesn’t change anything.

It is only if the work done by the women not caring for their children is worth more than the childcare that this process is generally wealth or value enhancing for the society as a whole. Fortunately, we have a method of working out the value of work - the wages paid for it.

If the wages paid to those women who work while parking their children are greater than the costs of the parking then this is indeed value enhancing. If those wages aren’t then it is not - indeed, can be value subtractive.

The end result of this is that far from Ms. Creasy’s call, that society as a whole must subsidise childcare we want to do this the other way around - entirely abolish all subsidies to any childcare whatsoever.

Well, that’s the economic answer at least. We agree that social considerations and so on could arrive at a different answer. But it is indeed true that the economic arguments around childcare are that there should be, must be, no subsidy. Precisely because the childcare that requires subsidy is value destroying for society as a whole. The work being done instead of the childcare isn’t worth enough to pay for the necessary childcare for that work to be done. Therefore it is the childcare that should be done, not the work. By, of course, those economic arguments.