iamsickofyear12 said:
Women should not get paid maternity leave and childcare should be determined by market forces. If you want to have a child you should pay for it, not your employer and not the government.
I don't agree with employers being forced to have sole responsibility but they should have some - it should be split amongst employer, government and individual.
If you want a population to continue to be sustained, you cannot expect individuals to fund children on their own.
People are happy to have government supported pensioner-related-plans because of this logic that they've worked hard for the country and blah blah blah so they deserve to be taken care of - why then can't that logic be transferred to issues relating to children? The country would be fucked without children just as it would have been had those pensioners not existed and done everything they have done.
You're more or less punishing "non-bogans" by not allowing sufficient assistance to enable women to feel comfortable having kids and working and you're punishing those who do not live off a wealthy partner. I know a lot of women who work who are not sure if they want to have kids because they don't want to risk their career or end up having kids that never see them.... But at the same time, plenty of people who quite honestly shouldn't be having kids are happy to because they have nothing else to worry about in the way of work or study and the like.
But back to the main issue - that political party is a bad idea. When you start a party based on gender or another particular characteristic, people don't take you seriously and you end up having a pretty narrow view. Even as a female who doesn't agree with mainstream politics on maternity leave and child care issues and the like (which people need to remember, is not a "women's issue" as everyone infers... its is a "parents' issue") i would never vote for this kind of party. Would be a wasted vote IMO since it's not going to change the way things are.
