It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Trump goes left, new childcare subsidies

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Trump is not a conservative. He's probably the most middle of the road candidate that America has had for awhile. He will do what HE thinks is best, not what a party thinks is best. Every time he does, it makes me think more and more, that he IS NOT part of the Establishment. Which means the people win




posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Donald Trump is proposing what he feels is best for American families. I don't understand the problem some people are having with a strong leader.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
You're right, I don't like to admit he gets it right sometimes but I don't mind saying it. He doesn't have all bad ideas, just I disagree with some of his major points.

I don't get what is so bad about helping families with kids.


Well...

Trump's plan..

6 weeks (Maternity-Moms only)..paid unemployment insurance (not full pay)

Women whose employers don't offer paid maternity leave could collect six weeks of unemployment benefits



Economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who runs the right-leaning think tank American Action Forum, worries that this kind of proposal invites employers to drop their paid maternity leave policies and "stick it to the taxpayer."


Hillary's Plan that has been around a while...

12 Weeks (Maternity and Paternity - moms or dads)

At least 2/3rds income

money.cnn.com...



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Some are a MUST!
We aren't FU##ING nazis here.
But IT isn't up to the federal Govt to decide ,just FUND the STATES to decide,based on laws applicable.
We just want more polite values (I'd say DISCOURSE but THAT'S way out of the damn window for Progs)and the rights enforced fairly,LIKE YOU.
Claiming GREAT groups of ANY given choice is a fools errand,much less a black and white belief based on accommodating emotions.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Donald Trump is proposing what he feels is best for American families. I don't understand the problem some people are having with a strong leader.


The proposal is NOT what is best for American families.

He is not a strong leader. He is man-baby.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: thinline
Trump is not a conservative. He's probably the most middle of the road candidate that America has had for awhile. He will do what HE thinks is best...

...for him...FULL STOP.

That is the answer to everything trump.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Trump no longer talks about this because it's so controversial, but he will withhold billions of dollars from countries that don't support us and redistribute that money back to American families.

way to go Donald. Make it happen!



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

Charles Krauthammer criticized Donald Trump's proposal for new childcare subsidies, saying the Republican candidate was trying to "out-Democrat the Democrats."

The proposed subsidies would include tax deductions, rebates for lower-income households and new tax-preferred savings accounts, as well as a new promise of paid maternity leave for workers who don't now have it.

"I think this raises the question of how many Democratic parties does the country need," Krauthammer said.


insider.foxnews.com...

Not surprised to NOT see this posted.

The left probably likes it and doesn't want to say anything positive about Trump.
The right hates it, but doesn't want to say anything negative about Trump.

Like I've said, regardless who wins, taxes will go up, freedoms will be lost, the status quo will remain.

Here we have another entitlement program that is reportedly going to be paid by the savings from cutting fraud, waste, abuse from government.

What will happen is that the tax payer (those of us still paying) will get stuck with the bill.

I remember a time when government/business didn't care about childcare leave. You worked, you got paid.

You didn't work? You didn't get paid.


Here's another link to the "plan".
www.donaldjtrump.com...


I never saw this article. That is probably why I didn;t post it.

People do not get paid for childcare unless they are working or in some states in school full time.

Most modern countries have paid maternity leave. Family leave for the father. We are so far behind on that it is shocking.

If they get paid leave, they obviously are getting 'leave' from some type of job, where they have already contributed taxes.
edit on 14-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Trump no longer talks about this because it's so controversial, but he will withhold billions of dollars from countries that don't support us and redistribute that money back to American families.

way to go Donald. Make it happen!


No he won't. It doesn't make any sense.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Interesting isn't it. Certainly a Democrat idea to pay poor people to have kids (future Democrats).

My guess is he knows he can "talk" this up all the while knowing none of it would come to pass, even if he were elected.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   

paid maternity leave for workers who don't now have it.



I'll just leave that there as the thread seems to be drifting as if this is some sort of "welfare" or "entitlement"...

These people have paid their taxes.

Let them have their paid leave you stingy Scrooges.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Hazardous1408 because: Tags.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Perhaps he carries hot sauce everywhere he goes as well.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: DBCowboy

Perhaps he carries hot sauce everywhere he goes as well.



hahahahahahahaha

"Burn"



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

30 years ago, when the average working male made 30 dollars an hour, and jobs were easy to find... the woman could always stay home as housewife to tend to children.

more women are working then at anypoint in history. these women need paid time off when they give birth. i believe its a mothers right to tend to their child after birth, not a grandparent, or a day care

give women 6 weeks paid off. it should be mandatory.
help women with day care... me and my wife pay 1000 a month for after school care because we cant be home till 7pm.

i cant imagine what it would be like if i had an extra 1000 a month.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

While interesting, it's not really that exciting to us lefties. He says "tax deductions, rebates for lower-income households and new tax-preferred savings accounts" which (as some have pointed out) is vaguely similar to Clinton's position (which has been in place for over a year and is more detailed.)

I don't like the "tax-preferred savings account" because the ones who need this most are the ones who can't actually AFFORD child care. If you're making $9.00/hour and rent is $700/month (this is the situation for my daughter) and working two part time jobs and paying bills and food... you have maybe $20 left for that "tax-preferred savings account." You are literally paying things as they are due.

I prefer Clinton's plan to expand schools to every 4 year old and to give raises to child care workers and teachers. Our taxes pay for this. I like her idea to expand child care on campuses (many young families need this) and expand visitation programs to families in crisis (I've worked with a family in crisis (not mine... worked as an advocate) to help get them services and I know how difficult it is for people in this position.)

I think it's a small step in the right direction but I'm not sure the Republican party is backing him fully on this - so it means he really won't be terribly effective on any of it unless he can build a coalition with the Democrats. I don't see him tackling things like elder care, which Clinton does.

So it's kinda little and kinda late on his part but I'm glad to see a more centrist/liberal movement on his part.

#StillNotVotingForHim. #StillDon'tBelieveHim



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: DBCowboy

Here whats going to be funny.

Watching the Trumpeteers cheering for it.

Even though if Hillary (no I dont support the wrecthed hag either) suggested they would cry and moan.


Funny, isn't it. Predictable however.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Ya but they are the 47%, so they don't pay enough!



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Ya but they are the 47%, so they don't pay enough!


Deplorable isn't it, mate.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:44 PM
link   
The title should read;

"Trump gains vote of struggling single mom's looking for a way out"

or

"Trump earns vote of women stuck in bad relationships because they can't afford the cost of childcare"



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:51 PM
link   
This is one of his ideas that concerns me. I am truly torn over it.

On one hand, I am all for mothers taking care of their children, and obviously that means they shouldn't be working after delivery. Quite a few are single mothers as well, and living paycheck to paycheck. Even if one were to assume that someone in such a situation was being immoral by bringing a child into the world in such a situation, I can't throw that blame on the child, and the situation will affect it more than the mother.

On another hand, what will this do the availability of jobs, the profitability of businesses, and the cost of living? Business is already overburdened with regulations.

On another hand, why is the business expected to pay someone for not working? The employment contract was originally a simple exchange of labor for money, with an ongoing agreement to how much exchange would happen in a time period. It has expanded to now include healthcare, paid vacation, paid medical leave, retirement accounts, etc. At some point, it will become a nanny state in itself, with the pay being not for time worked, but for the title itself. At that point, a worker becomes useless and there can be no jobs.

On another hand, is it not in everyone's best interest to ensure the health of the worker? Maternity leave is indeed a health issue, and a critical one at that. If there is any social contract attached to employment, should this one policy not be at the heart of it?

On another hand, as the OP points out, who will wind up paying for this? The taxpayer? That's the way it has always worked before...

I ran out of hands a while back. Let's just say I'd like to see a balance somewhere.

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join