Author Topic: Donald Trump Unveils Child Care Subsidy Aimed at Women, Suburban Swing Voters (Mandatory Paid Maternity Leave)  (Read 24403 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Longmire

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,262
Fraud in unemployment programs is estimated at $4 billion a year. You won't squeeze enough out of that to "offset" Trump's plan.

I haven't seen the score on Trump's proposal but I do know that it will be part of a more comprehensive tax reform proposal to be presented on Thursday.

I also know that $4 billion represents approximately 10 million weeks of unemployment insurance which would cover almost 2 million paid leaves under the proposal.

The alternative of course would be the Clinton plan which is a lot less business friendly, so choose carefully.

« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 01:22:18 pm by Longmire »

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Attempting to reduce the election to one or two issues then claiming that this is an indication of no significant difference? Just sayin'. Can you say, "Supreme Court appointments"?  I note that Ronald Reagan's picture is on this website's header, but that many who post here against the Republican candidate have absolutely no respect for the Eleventh Commandment.

I know that I am new here, but I for one, do not believe that I am smarter than Ronald Reagan. I also understand that Newt Gingrich's platform included applying Lean Six/Sigma management training for all Federal agencies. 'No big fan of Gingrich per se, but he is right about that. If we can eliminate even 15% of the waste of the Federal government, we could balance the budget and maintain every single non-discretionary budget allocation, along with full funding for every existing entitlement off into the horizon without cutting anything. It's about cutting waste. Anybody believe that Hill-O-Lies would ever even consider that? (Anybody ever heard of Cloward-Piven or doubt that she is fully on board with that Alinskyite degenerate horror?)

Bottom line is that if Mark Levin and Larry Elder can vote for Trump and not have conniptions or tear their beards, then so can I.  So many of you nice folks non-political posts are fair, reasonable, interesting, objective, brilliant and fascinating. But when it comes to Trump, so many seemed to wax overly-emotional (intuitive) and behave as if he slapped their Momma.

I GET IT. He is a populist trying to win so that he can do a better job than a psychotic lunatic Marxist. I'm not happy about it either since I have been fairly SCREAMING FOR YEARS on a number of conservative websites  THAT THE REPUBLICANS NEEDED TO GET A VIABLE CONSERVATIVE INTO THE PIPELINE TO RUN or a populist would get the slot. Voila!

"It's disappointing and can be depressing and we don't have to like it. But we have to accept that this is basically a center-left electorate, not center-right." - Larry Elder  (a "small ell" libertarian with no dog in the hunt).

All of this agonizing and setting of hair on fire is becoming alarming. Particularly when the margin of victory in many battleground states will be razor thin and Trump will need every vote he can get to counter leftist voter fraud (which likely will be historically high this election).

You obviously didn't listen to Levin yesterday.  Conniptions would be putting it mildly.

Offline Night Hides Not

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Gender: Male
I haven't seen the score on Trump's proposal but I do know that it will be part of a more comprehensive tax reform proposal to be presented on Thursday.

I also know that $4 billion represents approximately 10 million weeks of unemployment insurance which would cover almost 2 million paid leaves under the proposal.

The alternative of course would be the Clinton plan which is a lot less business friendly, so choose carefully.

We shall see, said the blind man.

Ok, I'll hold my fire until Trump unveils his tax reform plan. He should also release his income tax returns.
You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.

1 John 3:18: Let us love not in word or speech, but in truth and action.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,567
This is not, @LMAO a government program.  The government is not providing the care and it is not a government subsidy.

The child/eldercare plan proposed by Donald Trump incorporates three ideals:  lower taxes on individual contributions to their own personal account, greater choice for parents, increased competition through expanded care covered through the plan.

Lower taxes, choice, increased competition---are these not the three pillars of fiscal conservatism?

And if these three pillars applied to child/eldercare help the American family, why object to it?

Of course it's a subsidy.  Tax breaks are, by definition, subsidies.  It is a new entitlement that, like all entitlements, will expand (i.e., from 6 weeks to 12 weeks) will incorporate new elements and will be more costly.  Saying "savings" will come from waste, fraud, and abuse is risible as that's what every Republican says for every proposed program, and those savings never materialize.

When did conservatives advocate the establishment of a brand-new government-subsidized entitlement program?  This is exactly like Medicare Part D, which works, but it has bloated the budget and added to the deficit.
Roy Moore's "spiritual warfare" is driving past a junior high without stopping.

Offline chae

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
Things like this is why when I apply for a job, I make a point of saying that my son has graduated from high school and that I'm not going to be having any more kids so that I can work any on call shifts or overtime needed.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,567
I haven't seen the score on Trump's proposal but I do know that it will be part of a more comprehensive tax reform proposal to be presented on Thursday.

I also know that $4 billion represents approximately 10 million weeks of unemployment insurance which would cover almost 2 million paid leaves under the proposal.

The alternative of course would be the Clinton plan which is a lot less business friendly, so choose carefully.

Another alternative is to leave the government out of child care, which would be even more business friendly.   That's the current system.

But, Trump can't do that, because his Democrat daughter is looking to make a name for herself by telling her dad he has to pander to women.
Roy Moore's "spiritual warfare" is driving past a junior high without stopping.

Offline Just_Victor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,765
  • Gender: Male
You obviously didn't listen to Levin yesterday.  Conniptions would be putting it mildly.

In all fairness, Levin's shtick is something of a continuous conniption.

If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.

Offline Longmire

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,262
Another alternative is to leave the government out of child care, which would be even more business friendly.   That's the current system.

But, Trump can't do that, because his Democrat daughter is looking to make a name for herself by telling her dad he has to pander to women.

Translation: its a business friendly proposal that will likely garner the support a lot of suburban women voters.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Translation: its a business friendly proposal that will likely garner the support a lot of suburban women voters.

Business friendly???!!!

Pretzel much?

Offline Night Hides Not

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Gender: Male
Business friendly???!!!

Pretzel much?

A picture from a recent gathering of "Conservatives for Trump":

You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.

1 John 3:18: Let us love not in word or speech, but in truth and action.

Offline LateForLunch

  • GOTWALMA Get Out of the Way and Leave Me Alone! (Nods to Teebone)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,349
If someone says they are going to cut spending by getting rid of "waste, fraud, and abuse" they really aren't serious about cutting spending.

That seems to be to be an unqualified admission of and acceptance of defeat. How does that square with conservative values?

Reform of government is a value derived from Classical Liberalism, which was derived from the Enlightenment. Surely you've heard of those things? Among them are found the origins for the libertarian movement (small "ell") in this nation, the civil rights movement (not the bogus anti-white, reverse racism, leftist race-baiting industry, but the authentic one), egalitarianism ( not the obsessive Utopian forsaking of the good in search of the perfect, but real equal opportunity in line with Originalist doctrine).

Sophistic and Marxist dialectic has skewed the debate about government to the point now where few if any candidates for president even MENTION eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. The fact that you, a self-described conservative are cynically dismissive of even the idea of being serious about it speaks volumes about the success of the left in controlling the content of political debate in this nation.

Trump has spoken about eradicating waste by eradicating both the EPA and the Department of Education altogether which is a universe of separation from Hill-O-Lies who is clearly intent on giving both of those departments absolute  and total immunity from oversite by either Congress or the Supreme Court through bureaucratic sleight-of-hand, to essentially convert them both into shadow governments with unlimited funding which cannot be cut, and wielding literally fascist powers of oppression over the population and business for which no appeal is permitted and which derive from foreign or "global" authority, not the U.S. Constitution or voters.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 02:01:33 pm by LateForLunch »
GOTWALMA Get out of the way and leave me alone! (Nods to General Teebone)

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,567
Translation: its a business friendly proposal that will likely garner the support a lot of suburban women voters.

It's neither business friendly nor taxpayer friendly.  If you think an entitlement like this wouldn't expand to MORE "free" weeks and to include daddy (in a full-blown family leave program) you're extremely naive. 

And no entitlement program ever "saves" money nor does it cost less from year to year. And that's "cost" as in "taxpayer cost." 

But, pandering is what Trump is into now in an attempt to burnish his liberal credentials.

What else does his registered Democrat daughter have in store for us schlubs?
Roy Moore's "spiritual warfare" is driving past a junior high without stopping.

Online corbe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38,599
Trump has spoken about eradicating waste by eradicating both the EPA and the Department of Education altogether


@LateForLunch

    I distinctly remember Trump not ONLY wanting to keep the Ethanol Mandates, but EXPAND them, this he told those Iowa farmers during the Caucus, this does not SQUARE at all with someone that wants to 'CUT' Govt.  I'm not even bringing up his twisted logic on Common Core and the DOE.
No government in the 12,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline Truthsearcher

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 384,979
  • Let's Go Brandon!
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.

Same here I have been back and forth so many times I have lost count.........Welcome to TBR!
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline Longmire

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,262
A picture from a recent gathering of "Conservatives for Trump":

 :laugh:

Offline Night Hides Not

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Gender: Male
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.

Welcome Truthsearcher! I sent out a request for a lifeline to you this morning. I would have done it myself, but my privileges have been suspended by JimRob.
You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.

1 John 3:18: Let us love not in word or speech, but in truth and action.

Offline Just_Victor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,765
  • Gender: Male
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.

Seems like a daily occurrence.

And welcome to TBR. 0005a
If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.

Offline GrouchoTex

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,384
  • Gender: Male
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.
I've been wrestling with this since he won the nomination.
I am solidly #NeverHillary, but I can't seem to talk myself into being for Trump.
Things of this nature keep popping up.
Voting the lesser of two liberals is not what I am wired to do.

Offline GrouchoTex

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,384
  • Gender: Male
And just last week I talked myself into voting for him.  Nice job Donald, you've pushed me back to "unsure" again.
And, of course, welcome,
(where's my manners?)

Offline LateForLunch

  • GOTWALMA Get Out of the Way and Leave Me Alone! (Nods to Teebone)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,349
Trump has spoken about eradicating waste by eradicating both the EPA and the Department of Education altogether


@LateForLunch

    I distinctly remember Trump not ONLY wanting to keep the Ethanol Mandates, but EXPAND them, this he told those Iowa farmers during the Caucus, this does not SQUARE at all with someone that wants to 'CUT' Govt.  I'm not even bringing up his twisted logic on Common Core and the DOE.

Ethanol yes. I disagree with that decision  (political, clearly) because it was likely driven by strategic exigencies. Trump is after all a populist - no denial there. His stance on Eminent Domain (Kelo) and ethanol subsidies are examples of that brand. There are however billions of dollars more in subsidies that are a huge corrupt bundle of entitlements to the Farm Lobby disguised thinly as subsidies. Ethanol is only a very small portion of that massive wasteful open sewer of special interests with powerful lobbyists preserving their strangle-hold on government. Many very wealthy farmers producing virtually every crop and even more-wealthy corporations receive massive amounts of tax-funded free money for essentially no good reason every year, and Trump has indicated that he is considering eradicating them. Larry Elder explored this in detail on one of his shows.

Since Trump has no ties whatsoever to farm lobby for funding or support, he is the only candidate who likely has the political independence to generate reforms in Farm subsidies, his endorsement of ethanol subsidies to the side. I will gladly trade keeping some ethanol subsidies if we eliminate countless billions is wasted subsidies to the sugar, milk, pork, beef, corn, wheat, sorghum, beet, lettuce, barley etc. producers .
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 02:59:15 pm by LateForLunch »
GOTWALMA Get out of the way and leave me alone! (Nods to General Teebone)

Offline Truthsearcher

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20
I've been wrestling with this since he won the nomination.
I am solidly #NeverHillary, but I can't seem to talk myself into being for Trump.
Things of this nature keep popping up.
Voting the lesser of two liberals is not what I am wired to do.

Thanks everyone for the welcome.

The rationalization I used was that I should fight the battle I'm in now and worry about the battles in the future in the future.  So take Trump over Hillary now, and then oppose Trump whenever he is tempted to swing left should he win.

But the enthusiastic response this proposal got on FR simply because it's proposed by Trump really made me pause: as I wrote on FR,  I’m entirely unsure that a Trump presidency where he pulls half of the conservative constituency drastically to the left, is any preferable than a Hillary presidency where the conservative opposition is dug in and determined to oppose her agenda.


Offline GrouchoTex

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,384
  • Gender: Male
Thanks everyone for the welcome.

The rationalization I used was that I should fight the battle I'm in now and worry about the battles in the future in the future.  So take Trump over Hillary now, and then oppose Trump whenever he is tempted to swing left should he win.

But the enthusiastic response this proposal got on FR simply because it's proposed by Trump really made me pause: as I wrote on FR,  I’m entirely unsure that a Trump presidency where he pulls half of the conservative constituency drastically to the left, is any preferable than a Hillary presidency where the conservative opposition is dug in and determined to oppose her agenda.

Well said.

Online corbe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38,599
Since Trump has no ties whatsoever to farm lobby for funding or support, he is the only candidate who likely has the political independence to generate reforms in Farm subsidies, his endorsement of ethanol subsidies to the side. I will gladly trade keeping some ethanol subsidies if we eliminate countless billions is wasted subsidies to the sugar, milk, pork, beef, corn, wheat, sorghum, beet, lettuce, barley etc. producers .

@LateForLunch

  You still Waiting on that Publishers Clearing house guy to show up???? 888high58888
No government in the 12,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline chae

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
@LateForLunch

Cruz came out strongly against ethanol subsidies and won Iowa, but I digress.

Are you trying to say that Trump is saying what he thinks he has to say to win, regardless of what he really believes?  And if that's the case, then how can one believe anything he says on anything?