yea France definatly has it going on for them!!! I think it's amazing!

But aren't French taxes kinda high?? That's probably why they have all this assistance money. But it sounds like a sweet gig for millionaires.

Too bad we don't have something like that over here :-\ I have a friend in the Netherlands that gets a year off for Maternity leave with payment! Oh well lol

wadewifey3, I can't stress this enough. Please everyone understand that these benefits don't materialize out of thin air. People who work middle class jobs, especially those who are single and childless, are being robbed blind by Inland Revenue so that breeders can have their cushy benefits.

I think it should be the individuals' responsibility to provide for their children, not the government's. If you can't afford them, don't have them.

Canadians get a year off too with maternity leave/pay. Not your full salary but I think about 60%.

well, I'm in the US and I pay a ton of taxes because of my income level, but have horrible benefits at my job --- I have the mandatory 3 months of leave, but it's all UNPAID. so, it's not like the amount of taxes you pay necessarily corresponds to the maternity benefits you get if you have a private employer, at least in the US.

Chocolatine-We here in the US get taxed, us breeders and non breeders alike. We are offered no paid maternity leave, some are offered no leave without risk of losing theire job. Childcare, center or nanny, is very costly as is the cost of delivering a child and the nine million dr visits that accompany an infant. So on top of the out of pocket expenses of caring for an infant we have our taxes as well. So I say YAY France and the Netherlands and Sweden, etc. for recognizing the general needs of babies and their families.

I got 4 months of paid maternity leave...here in the US. However, I used my sick and vacation leave for that to be paid. I save it up for 5 years with minimal vacations so that I could stay home with my daughter for the first 4 months. After that, I was ready to go back to work and so was my daughter...although she didn't really know any other way.

My daughter loves her daycare and I love that she gets that interaction. Every day she jumps out of bed ready for her day and then her night with mommy & daddy.

Childcare is expensive. That's the main reason we're waiting to produce a sibling for our daughter...we can't afford it. That's just part of life...also I'm trying to save up my leave again so that I get paid maternity leave!

Roarman, do you pay 60% of your income in taxes and mandatory insurance, even if your income is in the five figures? 'Cause this is how high the taxes are in countries with the more "generous" maternity leave policies.

I just think that it's unfair to make someone pay through their nose for a benefit that they may not be able to claim for themselves down the line (e.g. if the person is infertile or chooses not to have children). And if a mother chooses to stay home with her baby for year or longer, more power to her, but she shouldn't be paid for it out of MY tax money.

It should be like SugarKat described: want to stay home with the baby, do it via your own resources.

Finns get 3 years maternity or paternity leave. Plus money for the stay home parent and child no matter the family's income.

I say hurray for France! I would be willing to pay more taxes if I got more out of it. I am in the same situation as SugarKat (almost exactly, love - we could be twins! LOL!), but I also recognize that I am rather fortunate. I know quite a few people whose leave was totally unpaid, and couldn't afford to take much of a leave. I wish that there was more out there to help families.

Chocolatine, aren't there other benefits that you get from paying those taxes?

what am i still doing in the U.S.

do you pay 60% of your income in taxes and mandatory insurance, even if your income is in the five figures? 'Cause this is how high the taxes are in countries with the more "generous" maternity leave policies. That's not true for Finland anyway. We belong to the top 10% of wage earners and only pay %32 in taxes.

Twinkle, what are Finland's immigration policies??

just thought i'd share cuz my bf and I both found this shocking...in a good way... one of my male friends got maternity leave for a month when his gf gave birth to their baby, and he got 60% of his paycheck. we thought that was so cool. she got 3 months maternity leave but I don't remember if she got paid or not. but she did have job security. the thing that mostly surprises me though, is the fact that they both work in retail.

pinky, that is great to hear! I bet they were both so happy to be able to spend time with their little one! The first few months are so hard!

MartiniLush, the only benefit I could think of is unemployment assistance. This is something I'm happy to pay taxes for, because unemployment is something that could affect everyone. But I may never have children, and thus never be a beneficiary of paid parental leave and subsidized childcare, which is highly unfair.

I'd rather have the bulk of my income paid directly to me, and if I decide to have a child I'd spend this money on childcare/taking time off work. If however I decide not to have children (or won't be able to), I could use the money that *I* earned on things that benefit *me*, not somebody else's baby.

Martini - It's easy to immigrate if your husband/boyfriend is a Finn.

Sounds good to me chocolatine!

Anyone know what the tax rate is in France? I'd love to know.

Nope, so I guess it would be hard for me, Twinkle!
Your tax rate is the same as mine in the US! Makes me sad to think that I pay all that money out and get so much less in return.

chocolatine, what happens if you are in an accident or become disabled? Does the government provide medical care or disability income? That would be something that would be worth it, too. I know my extra disability insurance (which is provided by a private co out of my own pocket) payments are a lot.

What is written is not entirely true. They could get 740 Euros (around 508 $)as family allowances for their 6 children and not only for the 3 adopted ones per month every month and up to 50% of a nanny salary as tax relief. As a rich couple, their revenue tax rate would be of 50%.

My understanding is that France and other countries like it offer many things beyond maternity leave and childcare. Such as healthcare, disability/unemployment, which effect everyone. We have high tax rates here, but don't get much out of them.

MartiniLush, disability or unemployment is a hardship that could befall anyone. There is a risk that it happens to me, therefore I'm happy to pay taxes/insurance for that, so that I'll be taken care of if this happens.

Procreation, however, is a choice and in many ways an indulgence. I have *nothing* to gain from other people's reproductive choices, therefore I shouldn't be financially supporting them.

gaellemj, your currency conversion is incorrect. EUR 740 = US$ 1090.

so really, chocolatine, all you object to is any benefit specifically for those who "procreate"? Just trying to understand you.

I guess you do, in a side way, benefit from those having children. Their kids will be the ones paying taxes to support the benefits you agree with when you are old and no longer working.

Roarman, you're right in a way. The US citizens have to pay for the Iraq war, and I wouldn't be happy to pay for that either.

The point I was trying to make is that I think that taxpayers should only fund those benefits that all citizens can take advantage of, such as healthcare and education. Funding something that favors a part of the population is frustrating to the non-favored part.

All citizens can take advantage of having children - either by giving birth or adopting. You may choose not to do it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't something you could have taken advantage of. Besides, you should be happy, they are providing the next generation to pay those taxes for your retirement.

chocolatine (and others), don't forget that France has been struggling with low birth rate issues and a decreasing population since the First World War, so they offer incentives such as these specifically to encourage families to have more children.

Also, the benefits only go towards people who are in the public sector, and not those that are privately employed. 'Liberales,' or anyone who doesn't work for the government - doctors, dentists, small business owners, private school teachers, etc. - don't get retirement, maternity leave, insurance, or any of the other benefits. And they still pay the 50 to 60% tax that public employees pay.

MartiniLush, I'm not objecting to "any" benefits, only the part where people get paid for not working, when it was their choice not to work.

And no, other people's children will not be paying for my retirement, because I'm also forced to pay "retirement insurance" - whatever money I get will have been earned by me.

I hate the smug attitude of people who think they're doing the world a favor by having children.

But, won't you get medical benefits? Their taxes will pay for that, right?

I wasn't trying to be smug, I really just don't understand your reasoning. You seem to want to pick and choose what you get from the taxes you pay. Usually the taxes we pay for social programs are for all society. I most likely won't get Social Security in the US when I retire, but I gladly pay the taxes so that others who are less well off may have some security. It benefits me in the long run and makes for a more just and civil society, IMO.

My reasoning is that I don't want to pay for other people's lifestyle choices. If someone wants to stay home for a few years to raise their child(ren), I shouldn't have to subsidize it. Staying at home is a luxury, not a necessity. If I decided to take 2-3 years off work to travel or volunteer, I wouldn't get a penny from the government, and certainly not my job back after I return.

My retirement will be taken care of by the government pension that I'm being forced to pay throughout my working live (9.5% of my salary, no less), and private savings. I can take care of my own retirement.

cotedazur - ok, that explanation makes much more sense to me and would be a reason to not like this.

chocolatine, thank you so much for sharing that perspective with everyone. I can not stand to hear people say stuff like "oh their health care is free..." It is never free, someone always has to pay for it, and that someone is in part, YOU! The more money the government takes from citizens in the form of taxes, the more dependent they are making citizens upon the government. One year of paid maternity leave sounds nice (to those who may want to use it one day), but I'd much rather be in control of more of my own money (and thus, my own decisions) rather than get a "free year" - but lose 60% or more of my income EVERY year!

Choclatine, you almost have it exactly right. Citizens should only pay taxes on things they can't do on their own. Citizens have the ability to work and fund their own child care costs, so they shouldn't pay taxes on that. Citizens can also plan ahead(via savings or insurance)for disasters, medical troubles, and unemployment, so the government should not be paying that.

Citizens can not build their own roads. Government can tax me for that.

And I'm sorry I spelled your name wrong!

Cheers to everything Michelin said! And everything Chocolatini said! I don't want to fund anyone else's life choices.

You know, I didn't get why Chocolatini didn't like this, so I PMed her and I got a lot more info. After that, I am with her - she told me a lot more info that could make your hair curl! And what Cotedazur posted makes it seem extremely unfair - everyone pays the same taxes, but not everyone get to take advantage of these benefits, only those in the government working sector get this. That definately isn't fair!

(martini, I love you! You're so reasonable and actually listen to varying viewpoint!)

Sorry, but I just really like this gal!

awww, thanks, syako! you know that i love you, too!

"The total of their child care assistance is high due to the number of children they have, but I am still impressed that people of their stature would qualify for such aid."

I don't understand why Lil is impressed that rich people would qualify for this aid. To me it is repugnant.

Whats worse is that Brad and Angie probably claim themselves as US citizens meaning they don't even pay the taxes in France! How does that work? Or do they claim themselves as French citizens? I wish these people would pick a country and stick to it.

Chocolatine-I have to agree with Martinilush, it is not clear what you are trying to state. You keep talking about rearing children as a choice, which it is, but Martinilush is completely correct in that without these children there would be noone to sustain a society, we are all going to get old. And I am not trying to say Yay for "pro creators" and I don't think Martinilush was either, but that is how a society continues, by people pro creating. When you are older and not working, you will need some type of services, that the younger working population, through taxes, will be contributing to. The point is, in places like France and Sweden, all citizens at some point will benefit from these National programs, not just those having babies.

Roarman, you beat me to it, I was going to point out that with no children there will be no doctors, police, grocers, etc. Raising the next generation benefits all of us. Although it's a "choice", it's also a benefit to society, like public libraries or education.

I still think this program is excessive, particularly if it doesn't apply to all citizens equally and equitably.