The Globe and Mail, August 6, 2026
Excerpt: "You might have heard of this kind of kitchen-table math: A new parent (usually mom) would make barely enough to pay for child care if they went back to work, therefore they should just stay at home. I always found this reasoning odd.
To be clear: For many people, the decision to stay at home with young children is about much more than financial factors. And I have zero issues with whatever parents believe is best for them and their families.
But if the deciding factor is the math, then let’s do the math properly, shall we?
That means taking into account the long-term financial repercussions of taking years off work. And new research by a trio of Canadian and American economists offers some solid evidence for what I and many others have long suspected: Those repercussions are significant.
The study finds that Quebec’s subsidized child care program led to mothers both working more and earning more for decades, long after their kids aged out of the system. Although the research is focused on public policy, there is a clear personal finance takeaway there.
I reached out to Kevin Milligan, one of the authors of the study and a professor of economics at the University of British Columbia. Here’s our interview, edited for flow and length."
