Ivanka, Donald to Roll Out New Childcare, Maternity Leave Policy For Moms

[jimnyc]

Ivanka, Donald Trump To Roll Out New Childcare, Maternity Leave Policy For Moms In Pennsylvania

NEW YORK — Republican nominee Donald Trump and his daughter Ivanka Trump plan to roll out a detailed childcare policy plan outside Philadelphia on Tuesday.

“This does underscore a major contrast between our campaign and Hillary Clinton’s—you heard Mr. Trump talk about it last night at his rally in North Carolina: Mrs. Clinton doesn’t have a single original idea or a fresh concept about anything,” a senior Trump aide tells reporters. “Nobody knows why she’s running except that she feels like she’s entitled to be president and beyond that I guess she owes a lot of people a lot of favors. But in terms of helping the American people, you couldn’t name one reason.”

Trump, on the other hand, has laid out a series of detailed policy platforms he says are designed to help all Americans. In recent weeks, the GOP nominee for president has presented ideas on foreign policy, trade policy, immigration policy, education policy, tax policy and military policy. In suburban Philadelphia, Trump will roll out a policy plan designed to help middle and working class mothers better afford childcare.

Childcare policy is an area politicians in Washington often ignore, especially when it comes to children from birth to 4 years old—a very expensive timeframe for new parents.

“Zero through 4 aged children there has been a real dearth of policy work in Washington, D.C., and in general—that’s one of the first things we found when started on the policy work,” a Trump aide said. “There’s been some work at the pre-K level and obviously K-12, but very little for zero through 4.”

Trump’s plan focuses on using the tax code to help new parents to allow them to deduct both childcare expenses and elderly dependent expenses for up to four total dependents from their income taxes. Trump aides say the tax deduction is available for taxpayers who take the standard deduction and is capped at the average cost of care for the state of residence, but those in the upper echelon, making more than $250,000—or $500,000 if filing jointly—per year will not be eligible for it. It will also offer as much as $1,200 per year per eligible family in child care spending rebates through the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Stay-at-home parents and working parents will both be eligible for the same tax deductions.

In addition, as the policy team for Trump laid out for reporters on Tuesday morning, Trump’s plan would create Dependent Care Savings Accounts (DCSAs)—as opposed to Dependent Care Flexible Savings Accounts (FSAs) in current law—that would be available to everyone. FSAs in current law are only available to people if offered by an employer, and they do not allow balances to accumulate or roll over. Trump’s DCSAs would offer both tax-deductible contributions and tax-free year-to-year appreciation, while also being available to everyone. The accounts allow for people to set aside extra money to pay for both childcare and for care of elderly dependents.

When helping children, the Trump team notes, it can be applied to traditional childcare, after-school programs and help with school tuition—in addition to Trump’s school choice program. For lower-income parents, Trump’s team notes, the government will match half of the first $1,000 deposited in the account per year. When used for helping elderly dependents, Trump’s team notes that the DSCA accounts can be used for covering a variety of services including in-home nursing and long-term care.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/13/ivanka-donald-trump-roll-new-childcare-maternity-leave-policy-moms-pennsylvania/

[fj1200]

Here was the next part:


The Trump plan would also offer six weeks of government-guaranteed paid maternity leave to all working women when their companies don’t offer paid maternity leave. The money would come through amending the existing unemployment insurance (UI) that companies are required to carry, and would be paid for by offsetting reductions in the program so taxes don’t get raised.

[pete311]

Trump is big government. He fooled you guys.

[jimnyc]

I hardly see this as big government. Individuals and companies already carry UI. The majority of companies out there already carry maternity leave. This will help those that don't fall under federal guidelines. One must already work a certain amount of time, in a certain period and make over a certain amount to qualify. I have no problem whatsoever in working with this to assist working Mom's and other maternity leave issues. Just as I have no issue with men qualifying for FMLA, and just as I have no issue with those 'already' qualifying to get 12 weeks off for maternity.

[jimnyc]

Trump is big government. He fooled you guys.

Sorry if you believe this somehow fooled me. :dunno:

[Perianne]

Trump is big government. He fooled you guys.

I don't remember anyone saying Trump would be small government. What he did say, and why I am supporting him, is the immigration debacle. If he stops immigration, he will have put a temporary hold on the takeover of this country by outside forces. That is fully why I am supporting him.

For some reason it is not sinking in some people's head that once they import enough Democratic-voting people, the Republican nominee for president will be unable to win.

[pete311]

What he did say, and why I am supporting him, is the immigration debacle. If he stops immigration, he will have put a temporary hold on the takeover of this country by outside forces. That is fully why I am supporting him.

Stop immigration? Our country will go negative for population growth.

[jimnyc]

Stop immigration? Our country will go negative for population growth.

Stop ILLEGAL immigration. We do not need ILLEGALS in order to survive.

[pete311]

I hardly see this as big government. Individuals and companies already carry UI. The majority of companies out there already carry maternity leave. This will help those that don't fall under federal guidelines. One must already work a certain amount of time, in a certain period and make over a certain amount to qualify. I have no problem whatsoever in working with this to assist working Mom's and other maternity leave issues. Just as I have no issue with men qualifying for FMLA, and just as I have no issue with those 'already' qualifying to get 12 weeks off for maternity.

Just to be clear, if Hilary came out with this instead, you'd cheer it too? "federal government guarantee up to six weeks of paid leave to new mothers". Suddenly the gov is right to enforce this? Where will it end?

[pete311]

Stop ILLEGAL immigration. We do not need ILLEGALS in order to survive.

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.

[jimnyc]

Just to be clear, if Hilary came out with this instead, you'd cheer it too? "federal government guarantee up to six weeks of paid leave to new mothers". Suddenly the gov is right to enforce this? Where will it end?

You do realize this primarily already exists? And NO, I have NO issue with it. While not specifically and only for maternity leave... And women already get 12 weeks of leave for maternity of that's what they choose. Of course one must qualify, but if they do, I have no issue with it.

-----

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) is a United States federal law requiring covered employers to provide employees job-protected and unpaid leave for qualified medical and family reasons. Qualified medical and family reasons include: personal or family illness, family military leave, pregnancy, adoption, or the foster care placement of a child.[1] The FMLA is administered by the Wage and Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor.

The bill was a major part of President Bill Clinton's agenda in his first term. President Clinton signed the bill into law on February 5, 1993 (Pub.L. 103–3; 29 U.S.C. sec. 2601; 29 CFR 825) and it took effect on August 5, 1993, six months later.

The FMLA was intended "to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families."[2] The Act allows eligible employees to take up to 12 work weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period to attend to the serious health condition of the employee, parent, spouse or child, or for pregnancy or care of a newborn child, or for adoption or foster care of a child. In order to be eligible for FMLA leave, an employee must have been at the business at least 12 months, and worked at least 1,250 hours over the past 12 months, and work at a location where the company employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles. The FMLA covers both public- and private-sector employees, but certain categories of employees are excluded, including elected officials and their personal staff members.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993

[jimnyc]

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.

Always back to "who will pick your food?" <--- ever been to PA? And the Amish folks, where I was just at? Who do you think picks the food for the farmers throughout the majority of PA? I assure you, it's not illegals!

[jimnyc]

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.

I said all along that the wall and enforcement were my big things. I can't imagine tossing out 11 million folks, but I wouldn't lose sleep over it either.

[Perianne]

Stop immigration? Our country will go negative for population growth.


Stop ILLEGAL immigration. We do not need ILLEGALS in order to survive.

Stop immigrating primarily from countries who are different from the average American. Right now our immigration plans are from countries of brown people. Who in heck ever voted for this????

[pete311]

I said all along that the wall and enforcement were my big things. I can't imagine tossing out 11 million folks, but I wouldn't lose sleep over it either.

Yes, but why? And why do you think a wall would work. Has building a wall ever worked in history much less modern day when relationships and open connections are more important than ever?

[pete311]

Stop immigrating primarily from countries who are different from the average American. Right now our immigration plans are from countries of brown people. Who in heck ever voted for this????

Why do you fear people who are different than you? Why is it important for American to stay bright white?

[Perianne]

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.

Do not let anyone work without a valid social security number (there are legal exceptions). Jail employers who break the law and hire them. You know, follow the law as it is presently written.

[pete311]

Do not let anyone work without a valid social security number (there are legal exceptions). Jail employers who break the law and hire them. You know, follow the law as it is presently written.

And then American will be magically great again? No unintended consequences? Laws as they are, are perfect? Maybe we should look at rewriting laws for better potential.

[Perianne]

Why do you fear people who are different than you? Why is it important for American to stay bright white?

I don't fear them.

America was founded as a white country. Who determined that should change? Why can every brown-skinned country have their own country, but America (and other white countries) must let in everyone, primarily brown people?

[jimnyc]

Yes, but why? And why do you think a wall would work. Has building a wall ever worked in history much less modern day when relationships and open connections are more important than ever?

Are people literally walking across the border now? Yes, they are. And many get caught, but with little to no penalty. A wall will prevent much... and they can also add to the wall so that they are aware when someone tries to cross. And yes, they have worked, and MANY countries have walls up, and others are now putting them up - even Britain is doing so. I believe they say that 65 countries in total have some form of walls up in order to protect their sovereignty.

As for working, Israel has had MUCH success with their wall.

[fj1200]

I hardly see this as big government. Individuals and companies already carry UI. The majority of companies out there already carry maternity leave. This will help those that don't fall under federal guidelines. One must already work a certain amount of time, in a certain period and make over a certain amount to qualify. I have no problem whatsoever in working with this to assist working Mom's and other maternity leave issues. Just as I have no issue with men qualifying for FMLA, and just as I have no issue with those 'already' qualifying to get 12 weeks off for maternity.

It is exactly big government. Yet another unfunded mandate by DC. I'm not quite sure how this is not establishment.


Just to be clear, if Hilary came out with this instead, you'd cheer it too? "federal government guarantee up to six weeks of paid leave to new mothers". Suddenly the gov is right to enforce this? Where will it end?

Hillary says 12. The major difference is how long it seems.

[pete311]

I don't fear them.

America was founded as a white country. Who determined that should change? Why can every brown-skinned country have their own country, but America (and other white countries) must let in everyone, primarily brown people?

Do you think it is healthy for a strictly segregated world by color when the difference is only a few genes? Why is a different appearance so undesired? What is life without diversity?

[jimnyc]

It is exactly big government. Yet another unfunded mandate by DC. I'm not quite sure how this is not establishment.



Hillary says 12. The major difference is how long it seems.

Call it whatever you will, I have no issue with it either way. Again, I had no issue when they gave 12 weeks using FMLA, and I won't have an issue with the 6-12 weeks or whatever here. Personally, I think it's a good idea to protect the moms and children this way.

[fj1200]

Call it whatever you will, I have no issue with it either way. Again, I had no issue when they gave 12 weeks using FMLA, and I won't have an issue with the 6-12 weeks or whatever here. Personally, I think it's a good idea to protect the moms and children this way.

I called it what it is. But big government it is then; the only question is how fast do we get there.

[pete311]

Are people literally walking across the border now? Yes, they are. And many get caught, but with little to no penalty. A wall will prevent much... and they can also add to the wall so that they are aware when someone tries to cross. And yes, they have worked, and MANY countries have walls up, and others are now putting them up - even Britain is doing so. I believe they say that 65 countries in total have some form of walls up in order to protect their sovereignty.

As for working, Israel has had MUCH success with their wall.

So they bring a ladder and rope.
http://time.com/4167626/donald-trump-ted-cruz-ads-immigration/

You are comparing Israel/Palestine with US/Mexico? We want to emulate that kind of environment? You realize how comparatively small their wall is to what ours would be? You want a patrol tower every 1/2 mile? What will that cost? Do you realize all of the geographic obstacles for the wall to maneuver?

[pete311]

Call it whatever you will, I have no issue with it either way. Again, I had no issue when they gave 12 weeks using FMLA, and I won't have an issue with the 6-12 weeks or whatever here. Personally, I think it's a good idea to protect the moms and children this way.

So you are ok with disavowing conservatism? Are you a centralist now?

[jimnyc]

I called it what it is. But big government it is then; the only question is how fast do we get there.

Sure, and you've been complaining about the big government behind UI for years now. :rolleyes:

Oh well, hopefully we get there REAL quick since I think this is a great thing to offer employees.

[jimnyc]

So you are ok with disavowing conservatism? Are you a centralist now?

So thinking this one issue, which I think is good for Moms and kids - makes me one who disavows conservatism now? Methinks some of you guys are letting the heat get to you.

[pete311]

So thinking this one issue, which I think is good for Moms and kids - makes me one who disavows conservatism now? Methinks some of you guys are letting the heat get to you.

You know what else is good for moms and kids. Is not mass deporting them into horrible situations. Some how you wouldn't lose sleep.

[jimnyc]

So they bring a ladder and rope.
http://time.com/4167626/donald-trump-ted-cruz-ads-immigration/

You are comparing Israel/Palestine with US/Mexico? We want to emulate that kind of environment? You realize how comparatively small their wall is to what ours would be? You want a patrol tower every 1/2 mile? What will that cost? Do you realize all of the geographic obstacles for the wall to maneuver?

No answer will be good enough for you. Bottom line, I see nothing wrong with protecting our sovereignty and our borders. Many other countries, including Mexico themselves, feel the same or similar.

What is the cost? Probably a few weeks worth of Obama's addition to our debt?

[jimnyc]

You know what else is good for moms and kids. Is not mass deporting them into horrible situations. Some how you wouldn't lose sleep.

Yes, and their governments should help them out. This policy is directed for those legally employed. I don't believe there will be a mass deportation. But if one of these idiots should be caught committing a crime - well then they should have thought about that first if they have children. I think illegals, any caught committing crimes, should get expedited to the front of the line, and we say adios!

[pete311]

Yes, and their governments should help them out. This policy is directed for those legally employed. I don't believe there will be a mass deportation. But if one of these idiots should be caught committing a crime - well then they should have thought about that first if they have children. I think illegals, any caught committing crimes, should get expedited to the front of the line, and we say adios!

Should, but won't, we know this. Where is our morality. The rest I agree with.

[Abbey Marie]

How is deducting child and elder care expense on your tax return "big government"? It's not a handout, which should be the thing Conservatives gripe about. People will at least have to work to take advantage of these "perks".

It is compassionate Conservatism, IMO. Aren't you for that?

If you truly want small government, get rid of the IRS altogether.

I do think paid leave should be provided by the employer only.

[fj1200]

Sure, and you've been complaining about the big government behind UI for years now. :rolleyes:

Oh well, hopefully we get there REAL quick since I think this is a great thing to offer employees.

There's a difference between employers offering a benefit and government mandating what must be given and yes, I do complain about big government mandating UI benefits beyond what is was meant to do.


So thinking this one issue, which I think is good for Moms and kids - makes me one who disavows conservatism now? Methinks some of you guys are letting the heat get to you.

The Lily Ledbetter Act is great for moms and kids... Universal health care is great for moms and kids... I'm not really sure where that list would end.

[pete311]

No answer will be good enough for you. Bottom line, I see nothing wrong with protecting our sovereignty and our borders. Many other countries, including Mexico themselves, feel the same or similar.

What is the cost? Probably a few weeks worth of Obama's addition to our debt?

If you were serious you'd be asking for much more than a dumb 35ft wall. Let's make it 100ft tall, 30ft depth, electrified, patrol towers every 1/2 mile, covered spike pits, tremor detection, 2000 watt spot lights every 1/4 mile with laser motion detection. Then maybe it will keep a few illegals out :D

[jimnyc]

There's a difference between employers offering a benefit and government mandating what must be given and yes, I do complain about big government mandating UI benefits beyond what is was meant to do.



The Lily Ledbetter Act is great for moms and kids... Universal health care is great for moms and kids... I'm not really sure where that list would end.

Well, I'm sorry that the government will be trying to do more for women and their children. The horror of it all! Anyone with such a thought, such a desire - don't pass go, just get immediately kicked out of the club!

[Abbey Marie]

If you were serious you'd be asking for much more than a dumb 20ft wall. Let's make it 100ft tall, 30ft depth, electrified, patrol towers every 1/2 mile, covered spike pits, tremor detection, 2000 watt spot lights every 1/4 mile with laser motion detection. Then maybe it will keep a few illegals out :D


Another earmark of libs: Extreme, emotion-driven examples to try to make a point.

I think I can speak for many that just keeping "most" out would be a welcome change of circumstances.

[jimnyc]

If you were serious you'd be asking for much more than a dumb 35ft wall. Let's make it 100ft tall, 30ft depth, electrified, patrol towers every 1/2 mile, covered spike pits, tremor detection, 2000 watt spot lights every 1/4 mile with laser motion detection. Then maybe it will keep a few illegals out :D

Please tell me you're failing at humor with this one?

[fj1200]

How is deducting child and elder care expense on your tax return "big government"? It's not a handout, which should be the thing Conservatives gripe about. People will at least have to work to take advantage of these "perks".

It is compassionate Conservatism, IMO. Aren't you for that?

If you truly want small government, get rid of the IRS altogether.

I do think paid leave should be provided by the employer only.

Nobody has really addressed the tax portion of the plan but a tax deduction especially of this sort is designed to influence behavior. Is it government's job to influence behavior? I thought I knew the answer to that from a Republican candidate. I think I read that payments would be made via the EITC which is questionable in its work requirements.

The mandating of paid maternity leave is a handout IMO. And through the UI businesses will be required to pay more through their payroll taxes.

[pete311]

Another earmark of libs: Extreme, emotion-driven examples to try to make a point.

I think I can speak for many that just keeping "most" out would be a welcome change of circumstances.

A 35ft wall won't keep most desperate people out. They already go through extreme obstacles. A dumb wall is just another.

[jimnyc]

A 35ft wall won't keep most desperate people out. They already go through extreme obstacles. A dumb wall is just another.

Maybe just electrify it enough to where people literally melt from it if touched? That would probably deter future folks from trying, no?

[fj1200]

Well, I'm sorry that the government will be trying to do more for women and their children. The horror of it all! Anyone with such a thought, such a desire - don't pass go, just get immediately kicked out of the club!

You've just given up any future objection to expanding government for the benefit of "women and children." If that's your position you should revel in it.

[fj1200]

hrc: Twice as compassionate as donald:




Guarantee up to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/paid-leave/)to care for a new child or a seriously ill family member, and up to 12 weeks of medical leave to recover from a serious illness or injury of their own.



You can't out-lib a lib.

[Abbey Marie]

Nobody has really addressed the tax portion of the plan but a tax deduction especially of this sort is designed to influence behavior. Is it government's job to influence behavior? I thought I knew the answer to that from a Republican candidate. I think I read that payments would be made via the EITC which is questionable in its work requirements.

The mandating of paid maternity leave is a handout IMO. And through the UI businesses will be required to pay more through their payroll taxes.

Re the bolded: That is why I said in my post that this part should be employer-only.

You are pivoting your argument now to details about the tax code and behavior. And I disagree. The child and elder care expenses are more fundamental than influencing behavior- it allows women to keep their job and afford to have children or take care of aging parents at the same time.

[jimnyc]

You've just given up any future objection to expanding government for the benefit of "women and children." If that's your position you should revel in it.

Sure. As if one stance in favor means you should ALWAYS be in favor of all stances, even if different. :rolleyes:

Troll Troll Troll your boat...

[jimnyc]

hrc: Twice as compassionate as donald:



You can't out-lib a lib.

I know, FMLA is horrid too. I say make them come to work, kids and all, even if they just gave birth. No money for you, banned one year!

[Perianne]

No government should force paid leave. Nor should the government pay people not to work.

On the other hand, giving tax breaks is a good idea. But not EIC. Any reduction in taxes paid by a working person benefits the country.

[fj1200]

Re the bolded: That is why I said in my post that this part should be employer-only.

You are pivoting your argument now to details about the tax code and behavior. And I disagree. The child and elder care expenses are more fundamental than influencing behavior- it allows women to keep their job and afford to have children or take care of aging parents at the same time.

I thought that's what you meant about the bolded but this is beyond the employer.

I didn't pivot; I responded. :poke: It may be a nice thing but you can't really say that the tax code doesn't influence behavior. This another unfortunate complication of the tax code IMO. How about a flat tax with a huge standard deduction that covers costs for whatever rather than jumping through hoops to get whatever monies doled out for specific reasons.

[fj1200]

Sure. As if one stance in favor means you should ALWAYS be in favor of all stances, even if different. :rolleyes:

Troll Troll Troll your boat...


I know, FMLA is horrid too. I say make them come to work, kids and all, even if they just gave birth. No money for you, banned one year!

As I said, if you're going to be in favor of expanding government programs then you should be proud of it. At least it's an honest, progressive argument.

[Perianne]

FJ

At the bottom of your posts, you have “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.”

Does that apply to you, too?

[Abbey Marie]

I thought that's what you meant about the bolded but this is beyond the employer.

I didn't pivot; I responded. :poke: It may be a nice thing but you can't really say that the tax code doesn't influence behavior. This another unfortunate complication of the tax code IMO. How about a flat tax with a huge standard deduction that covers costs for whatever rather than jumping through hoops to get whatever monies doled out for specific reasons.


I am in favor of a flat-tax.

Anything that happens on any given day can influence behavior. The weather, someone's arthritis flare-up. You name it. The point is, the tax code's ability to influence behavior takes a far back- seat to the fundamental need here, as I explained above.

Do you think people will abandon their parents, or not have kids, without this tax benefit? Those behaviors? We will have to disagree about that.

[fj1200]

No government should force paid leave. Nor should the government pay people not to work.

On the other hand, giving tax breaks is a good idea. But not EIC. Any reduction in taxes paid by a working person benefits the country.

EIC is a reduction in taxes paid by a working person (setting aside fraud and other negatives).


FJ

At the bottom of your posts, you have “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.”

Does that apply to you, too?

It's a natural human tendency. I try to fight my inclination.

[jimnyc]

As I said, if you're going to be in favor of expanding government programs then you should be proud of it. At least it's an honest, progressive argument.

I would be proud of seeing this particular issue go through. And only an idiot would take that to mean one then should automatically be supportive of ALL issues. Or someone trolling. Since you do it so often anymore, you may as well embrace it, own it.

[Perianne]

EIC is a reduction in taxes paid by a working person (setting aside fraud and other negatives).


In some cases, yes. Probably most cases. But sometimes people can get back more in taxes than they paid. You probably didn't know that. Stay tuned and learn lots of important things from me.

You probably only hear what you want to hear. :)

[fj1200]

I am in favor of a flat-tax.

Anything that happens on any given day can influence behavior. The weather, someone's arthritis flare-up. You name it. The point is, the tax code's ability to influence behavior takes a far back- seat to the fundamental need here, as I explained above.

Do you think people will abandon their parents, or not have kids, without this tax benefit? We will have to disagree about that.

But we're talking about whether it's the government's job to influence that behavior. I think it is not. I don't think people will abandon their parents or not have kids which brings up the whole question of what would be the point in the first place. Democrats pass laws to be nice without paying much attention to unintended consequences, I thought conservatives, err Republicans didn't.

[Abbey Marie]

But we're talking about whether it's the government's job to influence that behavior. I think it is not. I don't think people will abandon their parents or not have kids which brings up the whole question of what would be the point in the first place. Democrats pass laws to be nice without paying much attention to unintended consequences, I thought conservatives, err Republicans didn't.


Then what behavior is the gov't supposedly influencing?

[jimnyc]

In some cases, yes. Probably most cases. But sometimes people can get back more in taxes than they paid. You probably didn't know that. Stay tuned and learn lots of important things from me.

You probably only hear what you want to hear. :)

I'm tuned in woman!!

Fwiw, I think sometimes we all kinda only hear what we want to hear. Some folks just hear less or more.


http://i.imgur.com/3ChhoEZ.jpg

[fj1200]

I would be proud of seeing this particular issue go through. And only an idiot would take that to mean one then should automatically be supportive of ALL issues. Or someone trolling. Since you do it so often anymore, you may as well embrace it, own it.

You're kind of a sniveling a bit. Democrats have been pining to add maternity leave to the UI system for quite some time IIRC.


In some cases, yes. Probably most cases. But sometimes people can get back more in taxes than they paid. You probably didn't know that. Stay tuned and learn lots of important things from me.

You probably only hear what you want to hear. :)

I do know it's a crappy program which is why I mentioned it's fraud and other negative consequences. It needs some massive reform. Try again at your little gotcha game; you failed this time.

[jimnyc]

You're kind of a sniveling a bit. Democrats have been pining to add maternity leave to the UI system for quite some time IIRC.

I agree with the enemy then, shoot me. Again, I have no issue with FMLA either. Protection for mothers and children I do not have an issue with. If this makes me a filthy liberal, so be it.

I'd point out why I "snivel", and why others do, but it'll just be a back and forth of blah blah blah. Instead of trying to ever point out such crap, I'll just move along.

[fj1200]

Then what behavior is the gov't supposedly influencing?

Here? Childcare, eldercare, maternity... :confused: One question is should they? Another is would they actually be effective? I think the answer is no on both counts and should just be rolled into a flat tax but I can't buy any votes with a flat tax. :eek:

[Perianne]

I do know it's a crappy program which is why I mentioned it's fraud and other negative consequences. It needs some massive reform. Try again at your little gotcha game; you failed this time.

Here is the game: I talk, you listen. The world would be a better place if all men followed that rule. :)

[Perianne]

I'm tuned in woman!!

Fwiw, I think sometimes we all kinda only hear what we want to hear. Some folks just hear less or more.


http://i.imgur.com/3ChhoEZ.jpg


You would make a great husband. My feller is like that. He does what I say.

[fj1200]

I agree with the enemy then, shoot me. Again, I have no issue with FMLA either. Protection for mothers and children I do not have an issue with. If this makes me a filthy liberal, so be it.

I'd point out why I "snivel", and why others do, but it'll just be a back and forth of blah blah blah. Instead of trying to ever point out such crap, I'll just move along.

As I said own it. I'm more than happy to let you have that position.

[fj1200]

Here is the game: I talk, you listen. The world would be a better place if all men followed that rule. :)

More like you speak ignorance, I correct you. I'm pretty sure I know your game.

[Trigg]

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.


The majority of illegals are not picking food, and if that is your only reason for wanting them here, so that they can do menial labor, it's an insult to them.

Illegal immigrants are putting an undo burden on hospitals and schools. They are taking good jobs in construction away from legal Americans and they are driving down the wages for people in menial labor jobs.

Building a wall and deporting illegal aliens ISN'T a new idea. There are many videos of Bill Clinton, among other democrats disguising the same things.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZXbG5gvoC0

[pete311]

The majority of illegals are not picking food, and if that is your only reason for wanting them here, so that they can do menial labor, it's an insult to them.

Illegal immigrants are putting an undo burden on hospitals and schools. They are taking good jobs in construction away from legal Americans and they are driving down the wages for people in menial labor jobs.

Building a wall and deporting illegal aliens ISN'T a new idea. There are many videos of Bill Clinton, among other democrats disguising the same things.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZXbG5gvoC0

Yeah the ones not picking food are raping and murdering, right?

I just had some hard/landscaping done. All were Hispanic. They did an incredible job and worked extremely hard.

I am no fan of Bill Clinton.

"Illegal immigrants are putting an undo burden on hospitals and schools." Are they? Most pay taxes of some sort.

[jimnyc]

Yeah the ones not picking food are raping and murdering, right?

Liberal tactic #57 - make stuff up about the other member and pull things out of thin air.

Why, Pete? Why would you just try to portray Trigg as such?

[pete311]

Liberal tactic #57 - make stuff up about the other member and pull things out of thin air.

Why, Pete? Why would you just try to portray Trigg as such?

Echoing the Trump quote

[jimnyc]

Echoing the Trump quote

And why is it that you and so many on your side think half of the country are deplorable? Without even knowing them at all?

[Perianne]

And why is it that you and so many on your side think half of the country are deplorable? Without even knowing them at all?

I think half of their side is deplorable. So I guess it all balances out. They think we are, I think they are.

[pete311]

And why is it that you and so many on your side think half of the country are deplorable? Without even knowing them at all?

If you support a man with deplorable views, you must be a little yourself, no? ;)

[pete311]

I think half of their side is deplorable. So I guess it all balances out. They think we are, I think they are.

Until the end of time...

[Bilgerat]

If you support a man with deplorable views, you must be a little yourself, no? ;)


Rosie O'Donnell wants to take her menstrual blood and smear it into the faces of the right.

You want some?

[pete311]

Rosie O'Donnell wants to take her menstrual blood and smear it into the faces of the right.

You want some?

Sounds pretty deplorable to me ;)

[Perianne]

Rosie O'Donnell wants to take her menstrual blood and smear it into the faces of the right.

You want some?

Wow! She did say that!

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/08/14/rosie-odonnell-id-like-to-take-my-period-blood-and-smear-it-all-over-pro-life-peoples-faces/

[Bilgerat]

Wow! She did say that!

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/08/14/rosie-odonnell-id-like-to-take-my-period-blood-and-smear-it-all-over-pro-life-peoples-faces/


That's what I'm saying :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Rosie is one of the most disgusting people on earth.

[Perianne]

That's what I'm saying :laugh:
Bilgerat, I didn't mean to doubt you, sir. I just had to look it up and see what she/it actually said!

[Bilgerat]

@Bilgerat (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3372), I didn't mean to doubt you, sir. I just had to look it up and see what she/it actually said!

No worries m'lady. Just having fun with the company troll :laugh2:

[fj1200]

So what is the anti-establishment take on this?

[Perianne]

So what is the anti-establishment take on this?

I will speak for them. Actually, I already have.



No government should force paid leave. Nor should the government pay people not to work.

On the other hand, giving tax breaks is a good idea. But not EIC. Any reduction in taxes paid by a working person benefits the country.

[jimnyc]

The Trump Plan Will Help Working Mothers
My father wants to empower working and stay-at-home parents and give families freedom of choice in child care.
By Ivanka Trump

For me, motherhood is a gift and a tremendous source of joy. Yet it’s also the greatest predictor of wage inequality in our country. In 2014, single women without children earned 94 cents on a man’s dollar. Married mothers made only 81 cents.

We all agree that women should have equal pay for equal work, but that’s not enough. The lack of quality, affordable child care is one of the biggest challenges facing American parents.

The current federal policies created to benefit families were written more than 65 years ago when dual-income families were not the norm. Today, however, in about two-thirds of married couples, both spouses work.

In addition, 70% of mothers with children under 18 work outside the home; so do 64% of moms with kids under age 6. The number of households led by single mothers has doubled in the past three decades, and the majority of these women work in low-paying jobs without flexibility or benefits.

My father, in his campaign for president, has proposed a plan to bring federal policies in line with the needs of today’s working parents.

Part one is a rewrite of the tax code, allowing working parents to deduct from their income taxes child care expenses for up to four children, as well as for elderly dependents. This will be capped at the average cost of child care in each family’s state, and the wealthiest individuals will not be eligible for the deduction. The benefit is structured to ensure that working- and middle-class families see the largest reductions in their taxable incomes.

To bring meaningful assistance to lower-income Americans who don’t pay income tax, the Trump plan will offer rebates on child-care spending through the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).

In a nation where almost two-thirds of mothers with children under age six are employed, child care is an undisputed work-related expense. In business, other such expenditures are tax-deductible. This single reform under the Trump plan will effectively increase the take-home pay for tens of millions of American parents.

And what if one parent staying home to raise the children is the best option for a family? This is the praiseworthy choice of many, yet there’s zero value or recognition by our government for this hard and meaningful work. Under my father’s proposal, stay-at-home parents will receive the same tax deduction as their working peers.

The plan’s second part is the establishment of Dependent Care Savings Accounts, created to aid families in setting aside extra money to foster their children’s development and offset elder care for adult dependents.

These accounts will operate like Health Savings Accounts, with tax-deductible contributions and tax-free appreciation year to year. When established for a minor, funds from a Dependent Care Savings Account can be applied to traditional child care, after-school enrichment programs and school tuition.

To help lower-income parents, the government will match half of the first $1,000 deposited each year. Balances in a Dependent Care Savings Account will roll over from year to year so that a substantial amount of money can be accrued over time.

When established for an elderly dependent, a Dependent Care Savings Account can cover services like in-home nursing and long-term care. The ability to set aside funds will be particularly helpful to women, low-income workers and minorities, who are statistically more likely to reduce time working outside the home in order to provide unpaid care.

Rest here - http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-plan-will-help-working-mothers-1473803187

[Elessar]

Who will pick your food? Calm down I'm not advocating breaking laws. My question for you is why is illegal immigration such an overwhelming issue for you to overlook all of Trumps other negatives. You must know most of his immigration plans (wall and massive deportation) are not feasible.

There are many homeless roaming the streets and highways in the country begging for handouts.
Let them be hired to pick the food and be housed by the farmers, which is what is being done
with the illegals anyway.

[sundaydriver]

There are many homeless roaming the streets and highways in the country begging for handouts.
Let them be hired to pick the food and be housed by the farmers, which is what is being done
with the illegals anyway.

Most likely not a plausible idea due to the many problems associated with much of the homeless. Alcohol, drugs, mental health. etc.

[jimnyc]

Most likely not a plausible idea due to the many problems associated with much of the homeless. Alcohol, drugs, mental health. etc.

Ever been to the DMV or some other government run agencies? They sure look like they are all of the above!! :laugh:

[sundaydriver]

Ever been to the DMV or some other government run agencies? They sure look like they are all of the above!! :laugh:

DMV every four years. But all government workers look like that, ask dmp for a real pic of himself. :laugh:

[Elessar]

Most likely not a plausible idea due to the many problems associated with much of the homeless. Alcohol, drugs, mental health. etc.

I know that is questionable, but it is a start.

[Trigg]

Yeah the ones not picking food are raping and murdering, right?

I just had some hard/landscaping done. All were Hispanic. They did an incredible job and worked extremely hard.

I am no fan of Bill Clinton.

"Illegal immigrants are putting an undo burden on hospitals and schools." Are they? Most pay taxes of some sort.

Yes, they are..even in states where there aren't a lot of illegals. I can only imagine how much money the hospitals in California, New Mexico and Arizona are loosing to fraud. Schools in those states are also dealing with the burden of children who don't speak English with any fluency.

YOU seem to be confusing Hispanics with ILLEGALS, but don't worry many people seems to have that problem. I'm sure the people who did your lawn did a great job and worked hard. Were they here illegally???????????????? If so they were taking a good job away from someone legally here in America and the company should be severely fined.

Finally, My point with the video was to prove that building a wall isn't a new idea and (until Trump) wasn't considered a reason to scream RACISM

[fj1200]

I will speak for them. Actually, I already have.

He is sounding kind of RINO-ish. :unsure:

[Drummond]

Why do you fear people who are different than you? Why is it important for American to stay bright white?

Why do YOU insist on radical change ??

Is it because the more different the people, the greater the chance of changing America into something far removed from the original Foundling Father standards that America is meant to uphold ?

[fj1200]

Why do YOU insist on radical change ??

Is it because the more different the people, the greater the chance of changing America into something far removed from the original Foundling Father standards that America is meant to uphold ?

Like Federally-mandated paid-maternity leave? That's not in the Constitution.

[Kathianne]

Like Federally-mandated paid-maternity leave? That's not in the Constitution.

and expanding Medicaid even more than Obama has:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-15/trump-calls-for-expanded-medicaid-birth-control-without-doctor