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: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
And now, he's got dismal support from almost every demographic in the country

Got any stats to back up that statement?
From a legitimate source?

I have been using the "we the people" app for months now and have watched the shift and it's the exact opposite you all claim it is. Just because your small corner of the world doesn't support Trump doesn't mean the rest of the country has the same mentality.

Currently it's(rounded for convenience).
Clinton 18%
Trump 38%
Johnson 12%
Stein 30%

My source is 100% private user generated and out there for you to go check for yourself if you like. Everything you mentioned was supplied by a media that has a 6% approval rating...
Soooo yeah I'm not part of that 6%.




posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Somewhat progressive of Trump, which will obviously scare the conservatives among us. Nonetheless, Trump's arguments and policies seem fairly sound, especially if he is able to offset the costs as he promised. In comparison to Hilary's so-called more detailed Child Care Proposal, I cannot say either way because it seems to be missing on her website (anyone have a link?).



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
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.



I'd like to know when the shift happened from working to make a pay check to business paying you when you aren't working and government mandating it.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
This is a HUGE gamble. Trump's supporters will go for anything he says BUT there's a lot of Republicans that this will turn off.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:04 PM
link   
This is not a surprise. It seems as though Clinton's health will become a big concern for on-the-fence voters, so it would make zero sense for Trump not to pander in some way to those who were leaning toward voting for Clinton.

Candidates say crap all of the time that they won't do as President, or that they know won't pass through (or even get initiated) in Congress.

He's pandering, and if you ask me, he's picked the correct time to do it (from a political point of view).



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
The sooner the left/right divide is shattered, the better. Some policies associated to the left have merit, as do some policies from the right. There will be no coming together until there is a realisation that strict conservatism and strict liberalism are nonsense. I find the whole left/right argument to be complete BS.

This proves Trump is not a 'true conservative' and that is a good thing because true conservatives, just like true liberals, entrench themselves and point fingers, in the process getting absolutely nowhere.

edit on 14/9/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: DBCowboy



And now, he's got dismal support from almost every demographic in the country and it looks like his candidacy may cause the Repubs to lose their majorities in the House & Senate.


Seems like an odd thing to say when Trump is gaining in the polls and in the swing states. Not bad for someone who has no support from any demographic



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

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...


Paternity leave? Really? 12 weeks? Does she realize that in a medium sized business, 12 weeks for a man and woman to be gone will be overlapping with other people on leave? Paternity leave.....wow.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:12 PM
link   
The big difference between a Trump plan and a Hillary plan is the corruption level among the middle-men.

Most people are already stuck with big government "theft of service".




posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

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.


Sounds like you would support some type of plan to let companies keep a certain portion of your paycheck, kinda like 401K, that you can have for maternity leave (paternity leave for the beta males), and pay yourself back as money is put back into it.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
um...Trump IS a Democrat. I'm not sure why that surprises anyone?

Who has contributed to Democrat Rangel from NY? Who contributed over $10,000 to Harry Reid of Nevada to defeat a Tea Party Candidate? Who's contributed hundreds of thousands fo dollars to Democratic candidates over the years? Trump, that's who.

who attended Trump’s 2005 wedding to current wife Melania at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida? um...Hillary Clinton, one of his best friends.

Nothing wrong with being a democrat, we should judge all people individually, but it baffles me that non of you conservatives can see that Trump is an actual Democrat.
edit on 14-9-2016 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
This is a HUGE gamble. Trump's supporters will go for anything he says BUT there's a lot of Republicans that this will turn off.


It's like a massive game of Simon says...

I have lost track of how many times Trump has made "conservatives" advocate for and defend things they were staunchly against five minutes before he said it.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

It started back in the 70s and took off in the 80s if I remember correctly. I still don't understand it, but I am coming to accept it a little. If the people are willing to pay the price...

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5




I have lost track of how many time Trump has made "conservatives" advocate for things they were staunchly against five minutes before he said it.


For instance?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: intrepid
This is a HUGE gamble. Trump's supporters will go for anything he says BUT there's a lot of Republicans that this will turn off.


It's like a massive game of Simon says...

I have lost track of how many time Trump has made "conservatives" advocate for things they were staunchly against five minutes before he said it.


Yeah, I was just listening to an explanation of Trump's plan on the radio. When he calls for "Credits", fiscal conservatives whine "entitlements!", but those credits are the same thing that conservative think tanks have advocated for decades.

But the semantics aren't important, because the average working family understands that the government is going to spend OUR tax dollars someway, somehow. It's best to spend a chunk of them on the majority of people who send trillions of dollars to Washington... that's the "working class".

Let the Republicans who are against Trump go-ahead and slam his plans. This is a clear indication that he is on the right track, and will benefit greatly from his proposals on November 8th.

BTW.. what initiatives has Hillary put forward in the last 30 days? Besides telling us that as President, she will ignore 75 million U.S. citizens, because they're "deplorable", Hillary has proposed NOTHING that's newsworthy.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Indigo5

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...


Paternity leave? Really? 12 weeks? Does she realize that in a medium sized business, 12 weeks for a man and woman to be gone will be overlapping with other people on leave? Paternity leave.....wow.


Companies Like FB, Google etc. already have Paternity Leave...hell FB even pays "Baby Cash" bonuses...If you are a new dad they not only give you 4 months paid time off work, but they pay you a few thousand dollars bonus...
It doesn't hurt their bottom line...it INCREASES it...FB's revenues have been breaking records for while now.

What is the average employee worth to a company?
Even at failing companies like yahoo...each employee returns an average of almost 400k
For FB's employees...it's over 1.3M in revenues a year the average employee earns them.
www.businessinsider.com...


Taking care of people isn't a moral imperative...it's competitive advantage allowing you to hire the best in the world..

20 Companies that offer PATERNITY leave



Reddit: 17 weeks


2.Facebook: 16 weeks


3.Bank of America: 12 weeks


4.Yahoo: eight weeks


5.Patagonia: eight weeks


6.Google: seven weeks


7.Twitter: six weeks


8.Arnold and Porter: the primary caregiver gets 18 weeks of paid time off and the secondary caregiver gets six weeks


9.Comcast: four weeks (with the option of an additional eight without pay)


10.Microsoft: four weeks


11.Trip Advisor: four weeks


12.McKinsey and Company: four weeks


13.Covington and Burling LLP: four weeks for non-primary caregivers


14.PricewaterhouseCoopers: three weeks


15.McGraw-Hill Financial: three weeks


16.Deloitte: three weeks


17.Discovery Communications: three weeks


18.Fannie Mae: 20 days


19.Wal-Mart: 2 weeks (with an option for an additional six without pay)


20.Ernst and Young: two weeks (six weeks for primary caregivers)


workplace.care.com...
edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Would you support a plan like 401K for money to set back and use for things such as maternity, or paternity leave?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Indigo5




I have lost track of how many time Trump has made "conservatives" advocate for things they were staunchly against five minutes before he said it.


For instance?


His brief and mushy Amnesty flop comes to mind...I saw posters here on ATS who immediately went from "round-em-up" to...well...some folks don't break the law and how are we going to deport 11 million people...



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Indigo5

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...


Paternity leave? Really? 12 weeks? Does she realize that in a medium sized business, 12 weeks for a man and woman to be gone will be overlapping with other people on leave? Paternity leave.....wow.


Companies Like FB, Google etc. already have Paternity Leave...hell FB even pays "Baby Cash" bonuses...If you are a new dad they not only give you 4 months paid time off work, but they pay you a few thousand dollars bonus...
It doesn't hurt their bottom line...it INCREASES it...FB's revenues have been breaking records for while now.

What is the average employee worth to a company?
Even at failing companies like yahoo...each employee returns an average of almost 400k
For FB's employees...it's over 1.3M in revenues a year the average employee earns them.
www.businessinsider.com...


Taking care of people isn't a moral imperative...it's competitive advantage allowing you to hire the best in the world..

20 Companies that offer PATERNITY leave



Reddit: 17 weeks


2.Facebook: 16 weeks


3.Bank of America: 12 weeks


4.Yahoo: eight weeks


5.Patagonia: eight weeks


6.Google: seven weeks


7.Twitter: six weeks


8.Arnold and Porter: the primary caregiver gets 18 weeks of paid time off and the secondary caregiver gets six weeks


9.Comcast: four weeks (with the option of an additional eight without pay)


10.Microsoft: four weeks


11.Trip Advisor: four weeks


12.McKinsey and Company: four weeks


13.Covington and Burling LLP: four weeks for non-primary caregivers


14.PricewaterhouseCoopers: three weeks


15.McGraw-Hill Financial: three weeks


16.Deloitte: three weeks


17.Discovery Communications: three weeks


18.Fannie Mae: 20 days


19.Wal-Mart: 2 weeks (with an option for an additional six without pay)


20.Ernst and Young: two weeks (six weeks for primary caregivers)


workplace.care.com...


The thing those companies do it because they are trying to attract the best employees. They don't need to do it because of a government mandate. By not offering it, they are less competitive to the narrow group of employees they are trying to hire as their competitors may offer the benefit. This is the free market at work.

The other thing to remember too about many companies on that list is that they work their employees to the bone. I worked at one of the companies on that list and you'd regularly work 60-80 hour weeks. The expectations of an employee were extremely high. It is nothing for them to offer the leave in return for the commitment.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Indigo5




I have lost track of how many time Trump has made "conservatives" advocate for things they were staunchly against five minutes before he said it.


For instance?


His brief and mushy Amnesty flop comes to mind...I saw posters here on ATS who immediately went from "round-em-up" to...well...some folks don't break the law and how are we going to deport 11 million people...


He got the ball rolling, that's what matters. If you had the option to deport illegals that have committed criminal acts here in America, would you go for it?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join