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: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
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?


hmmm....maybe. I do not think the gov. should not be in the business of subsidizing reproduction...but we are at a disadvantage in the world where many very successful countries do.

I'd probably be Ok with a moderate regulatory nudge to employers to provide something in the form of minimum Maternity/Paternity...

But realistically? If places like WallMart all the way to FB are already offering Paternity (Dads) leave then it will be free market competition for talent that drives it.

Personally?...having lived through those first few weeks as a Dad? Multiple times..With babies crying and waking up at all hours and a sleep deprived, hormonal wife? Pretty sure most dads show up back to work within days, not weeks.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
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.


Good luck winning without the support of the whole party.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

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?


We not only have the option now, but it happens all the time...

Hell I watched a news bit a month ago where US veterans that have been deported to mexico for things like a DUI have formed an association. Illegals that served in Iraq and Afghanistan..came home...broke a law and were immediately deported.

The idea that we don't already deport illegal immigrants that are criminals is BS that Trump sells..Reality and the numbers tell the precise opposite.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: LSU0408
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?


hmmm....maybe. I do not think the gov. should not be in the business of subsidizing reproduction...but we are at a disadvantage in the world where many very successful countries do.

I'd probably be Ok with a moderate regulatory nudge to employers to provide something in the form of minimum Maternity/Paternity...

But realistically? If places like WallMart all the way to FB are already offering Paternity (Dads) leave then it will be free market competition for talent that drives it.

Personally?...having lived through those first few weeks as a Dad? Multiple times..With babies crying and waking up at all hours and a sleep deprived, hormonal wife? Pretty sure most dads show up back to work within days, not weeks.


I have a son turning 1 month this Sunday. I took one week of vacation. He sleeps all through the night though, except when he's hungry which is twice a night. I take a nap when I get home and my wife gives him his last feeding around 8 before she goes to bed, then I stay up until about 2 am which was normal for me before that. He'll usually wake me up around 5:45 or 6 so I'll feed him, change his diaper, swaddle him up tight and go lay him down and I'll get ready for work. Why am I telling you this? I totally forgot, lol. But I know how you felt being the papa of a newborn.

With a plan to have your own money withdrawn for a leave of absence, nobody else pays for it and you're able to pay yourself back if you choose to do so. You would have at least 9 months head start since no company, that I know of, will hire you if you're pregnant. Other benefits can include bereavement and sick leave.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

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 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.



Not that I disagree...I have a ton of Silicon valley clients and know those companies well...But in the bigger picture?...We are ALL being worked to the bone these days. Cell Phones and lap-tops have made almost everyone 24-7 slaves to their jobs, putting in more hours for the same pay.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: LSU0408

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?


We not only have the option now, but it happens all the time...

Hell I watched a news bit a month ago where US veterans that have been deported to mexico for things like a DUI have formed an association. Illegals that served in Iraq and Afghanistan..came home...broke a law and were immediately deported.

The idea that we don't already deport illegal immigrants that are criminals is BS that Trump sells..Reality and the numbers tell the precise opposite.


Why are so many able to come back and take up residence in sanctuary cities?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

No doubt they are worth every missed hour of sleep...profound joy...but no doubt a struggle and work too. I always said being a new dad was like someone turning up the volume on my life...everything was bigger..the joy, the worry, the responsibility, the bills..everything.

Honestly...in lower income households where they live pay-check to pay-check...or single working moms where the new dad bails...We do need something to help.

And while the 401k bit is a good idea...Lot's of the working poor don't have $20 dollars left after paying the bills, let alone the hundreds or thousands they would need to save to cover the time off after delivering. They live hand to mouth.




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



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   
How can helping single mothers with childcare be a bad thing?

Just curious.

I have no problem paying taxes for this. What I have a problem with is subsidizing regime change for central banking cartels and the plutocracy.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   
This is really one of our big issues as a country. We moved away from the American Stereotype of the big family that helps care for each other or the small rural community or Church that takes care of all of it's members in some way to help them get by.

We've moved away from empathy.

And what that does it it leaves certain families desperate and vulnerable to poverty, crime, drinking problems, drug addictions and who ends up getting hurt? The children, who become more vulnerable to the same. This is the cycle of broken families that we need to break.

At the heart of this isn't a handout, but a hand up to help families become stronger. A single mother or a struggling family living below the poverty line, this is huge.

And yes, it's just one small part. When we stop raising broken children, then we stop making broken families. Broken children have a hard time in school are susceptible to negative peer pressure and don't know how to "Adult" when they grow up.

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



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darkmadness
How can helping single mothers with childcare be a bad thing?

Just curious.

I have no problem paying taxes for this. What I have a problem with is subsidizing regime change for central banking cartels and the plutocracy.


Because when you subsidize something, you tend to get more of it. By in large, single mothers are a scourge on society. We need to be promoting stable families.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated




single mothers are a scourge on society


You know what the real scourge on society is?

Crappy fathers who can't own their choices and raise kids properly and help take care of their family.

You have some seriously messed up ideas if that's what you really believe.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Isn't the bulk of the program tax write offs?

I don't see what's wrong with that. I need to study it better.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: LSU0408

No doubt they are worth every missed hour of sleep...profound joy...but no doubt a struggle and work too. I always said being a new dad was like someone turning up the volume on my life...everything was bigger..the joy, the worry, the responsibility, the bills..everything.

Honestly...in lower income households where they live pay-check to pay-check...or single working moms where the new dad bails...We do need something to help.

And while the 401k bit is a good idea...Lot's of the working poor don't have $20 dollars left after paying the bills, let alone the hundreds or thousands they would need to save to cover the time off after delivering. They live hand to mouth.





I don't really know. I understand where you're coming from and to a degree I agree, but who should take responsibility for a new mother? The mother, the state, the feds, the employer? Decrease government benefits elsewhere to balance out benefits for leave. I don't know.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

But you can't mandate empathy.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: LSU0408

No doubt they are worth every missed hour of sleep...profound joy...but no doubt a struggle and work too. I always said being a new dad was like someone turning up the volume on my life...everything was bigger..the joy, the worry, the responsibility, the bills..everything.

Honestly...in lower income households where they live pay-check to pay-check...or single working moms where the new dad bails...We do need something to help.

And while the 401k bit is a good idea...Lot's of the working poor don't have $20 dollars left after paying the bills, let alone the hundreds or thousands they would need to save to cover the time off after delivering. They live hand to mouth.





I don't really know. I understand where you're coming from and to a degree I agree, but who should take responsibility for a new mother? The mother, the state, the feds, the employer? Decrease government benefits elsewhere to balance out benefits for leave. I don't know.


But it's like the homeless problem. Same thing with maternity leave or government helping families in need.

It actually costs the government more to not to anything. They've proven that with homelessness. in the case of ambulances, and shelters, and emergency room visits and police calls and city workers cleaning up streets and drug addiction etc.

With families when you just let them become broken, you end up paying taxes for Juvinile courts, adult courts, Judges, police, jail time, prison time, welfare for the children etc, etc etc.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darkmadness
How can helping single mothers with childcare be a bad thing?

Just curious.



It's not..

But comparing plans is legit...

Trumps proposal is both weaker and the math really sucks as far as his explanation of how the weaker plan will get paid for.

Hillary is at least honest in saying she will increase taxes on the wealthiest to pay for her plan.

Trump offers weaker options and claims he will pay for it by "cracking down on unemployment fraud"...not enough fraud to pay for it by a long shot even if he found every single person cheating on unemployment....not even close...

In that light Trump's plan looks like another unpaid for spending spree promise...and a much weaker one than HRCs or just pandering BS....or all of the above.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: amazing

But you can't mandate empathy.



No but would you rather your tax dollars went to military spending in Israel and war in Iraq for Oil and subsidies to big corporations that shouldn't need our tax dollars or put a little of that into helping families.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: xstealth
a reply to: DBCowboy

Isn't the bulk of the program tax write offs?

I don't see what's wrong with that. I need to study it better.


I won't pretend to understand all of it or how it's to be paid.

But like anything, everything else that's provided by government, it'll be abused, over-priced, and lead to higher taxes. It's an entitlement program.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: amazing

But you can't mandate empathy.



No but would you rather your tax dollars went to military spending in Israel and war in Iraq for Oil and subsidies to big corporations that shouldn't need our tax dollars or put a little of that into helping families.



That's the problem.

I want to keep my damned money.

I don't want it spent by government.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: LSU0408

No doubt they are worth every missed hour of sleep...profound joy...but no doubt a struggle and work too. I always said being a new dad was like someone turning up the volume on my life...everything was bigger..the joy, the worry, the responsibility, the bills..everything.

Honestly...in lower income households where they live pay-check to pay-check...or single working moms where the new dad bails...We do need something to help.

And while the 401k bit is a good idea...Lot's of the working poor don't have $20 dollars left after paying the bills, let alone the hundreds or thousands they would need to save to cover the time off after delivering. They live hand to mouth.





I don't really know. I understand where you're coming from and to a degree I agree, but who should take responsibility for a new mother? The mother, the state, the feds, the employer? Decrease government benefits elsewhere to balance out benefits for leave. I don't know.


Not sure either...If we go to far we are just subsidizing reproduction...we do too little and babies literally suffer and working moms that are barely making it already get broken, lose jobs, everyone goes hungry.

We need a net, not a crutch. That's all I know.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join