- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Ivanka and gop Senators unveil paid family leave plan today: CRADLE act
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:15 pm
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:15 pm
quote:
Key conservative lawmakers, with the support of President Trump and help from first daughter Ivanka Trump, have proposed a unique leave program for new parents, including those who adopt, that will provide up to 70 percent of a poor parent's income.
The plan, dubbed the CRADLE Act, wouldn’t be a budget crusher because it would give natural and adoptive parents up to three months of leave benefits if they agree to delay activating their Social Security retirement by no more than six months.
A benefit sheet showed that some single parents could receive up to 70 percent of their income to stay at home in the first months of having a child. If the income is near $17,000 a year, the monthly payment would be over $900.
For the retards who say this is muh deficit spending/big govt, it doesn’t involve increased spending or new taxes. The money comes from delayed SS retirement
LINK
16
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:18 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Pro-natalist policies should only be offered to net contributors.
ETA: We have to incentivize the productive class to have children, not everyone. Call it eugenic or whatever, but we are better off with well-to-do families having large amounts of children as opposed to those who are already a resource burden before additions.
ETA: We have to incentivize the productive class to have children, not everyone. Call it eugenic or whatever, but we are better off with well-to-do families having large amounts of children as opposed to those who are already a resource burden before additions.
This post was edited on 5/15/19 at 2:27 pm
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:20 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
For the retards who say this is muh deficit spending/big govt, it doesn’t involve increased spending or new taxes. The money comes from delayed SS retirement
Is it one for one on the dollars? If so, how? Money today worth more than money tommorow...
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:23 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
would give
Give huh? Someone is paying for it.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:28 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
This is a great plan. I like it.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:28 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Is it one for one on the dollars? If so, how? Money today worth more than money tommorow...
Huh? This is absolutely not how the time value of money works.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:29 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I would like to see the math, but on the surface it looks good.
Take one month off, it takes away 2 months of retirement.
take 2 off, it's 4 months of retirement gone
take 3 off, it's 6 months.
Take one month off, it takes away 2 months of retirement.
take 2 off, it's 4 months of retirement gone
take 3 off, it's 6 months.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:30 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Huh? This is absolutely not how the time value of money works.
So a dollar today has the same purchasing power as a dollar in 65 years?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:31 pm to HempHead
But muh Trump/GOP hates women and poors!
quote:100% agree with this. I like the idea of family leave, but we shouldn't be encouraging poor people who are already on government assistance to have more children that taxpayers end up footing the bill for on WIC, food stamps, housing, and medicaid
ETA: We have to incentivize the productive class to have children, not everyone. Call it eugenic or whatever, but we are better off with well-to-do families having large amounts of children as opposed to those who are already a resource burden before additions.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I'm confused. Is this just for poor people or all people?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:33 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
it would give natural and adoptive parents up to three months of leave benefits if they agree to delay activating their Social Security retirement by no more than six months.
It's not a terrible concept, but do we really believe Social Security will still be paying out by the time these new parents qualify for their distributions?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:33 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I'd love to see the democrats vote against this one.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:33 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
So a dollar today has the same purchasing power as a dollar in 65 years?
If invested, it has more.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:34 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
So a dollar today has the same purchasing power as a dollar in 65 years?
One, unless a person who is having a kid while being a kid, it's not 65 years.
Second, that's not what he stated.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:34 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
If it is for women I am for it. The democrats will diss it.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:35 pm to HailToTheChiz
all people
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:36 pm to ShoeBang
quote:
I'd love to see the democrats vote against this one.
I have already found the part.
"Must be an American citizen or here legally"
IT MUST INCLUDE ALL PEOPLE
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:36 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
If invested, it has more.
Will the dollars handed out today, to be “repaid” (in the form of delayed benefits) with dollars in the future be invested?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:38 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I'm not against paid parental leave, but what does this mean?
Is this just poverty line? If so, this is a waste of fricking time.
quote:
GOP offers parental leave for poor
Is this just poverty line? If so, this is a waste of fricking time.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 2:38 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
This is similar to the option I took when I retired from Public Safety. Public Safety employees are allowed to draw from their retirement accounts without penalty even if they are younger than 59 1/2 years old. Since my monthly withdrawals would be significantly lower than had I not retired, I was given an option to draw from Social Security to make up the difference. When I turn 65, or whenever I choose to begin drawing my Social Security, they will deduct the amount I took in early payments.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News