I hope she is nominated because we can kick her butt with stuff like this.
2007-09-28 16:35:58 · 16 answers · asked by mountaindew25 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Ha AC1bD - That's funny!
2007-09-28 16:45:14 · update #1
Right, merebear. Your thinking is totally awesome.
2007-09-28 17:05:02 · update #2
Hey guys, here is a link:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/28/2007-09-28_hillary_clinton_proposes_5000_baby_bonds-1.html
2007-09-28 17:16:31 · update #3
I haven't heard that comment yet. I wonder if it's really true. Hmmm.
I have to admit that it's tempting. But it's almost certainly not worth it in the long run. It would definitely be funded by a tax increase. Basically she'd be taking our money, giving it back to us, and feeling all proud of herself for "helping."
I'd rather have lower taxes to start off with. Then there's no reason to go crying to the government, your money is still in your pocket.
2007-09-28 16:57:08 · answer #1 · answered by merebear83 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
She shouldn't have floated this if she wasn't going to back it up with her plan on exactly where the money would come from.
As she said, the money would have to be used for purchasing a home or a college education. Why not address the fact that the price of real estate is out of control? Or that it takes a small fortune to put one kid through college? $5000 (even with interest) is nearly insignificant now, let alone in 2026.
2007-09-28 16:52:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
She must have stole this idea from Australia.
Do not let it happen it causes so many problems. Kids having babies to get the money and then after all the money is spent on (Big screen TVs,XBox,PS2,)
the novelty of this new tiny child wears off and they end up in welfare.
Of course this does not happen to everyone , but for young girls who are in perhaps a bad living situation many see it as a way of getting out.
Not a good idea at all...
2007-09-28 22:58:39 · answer #3 · answered by greeneyedaussie22 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is the first that I have heard of it. I am interested in learning where to find the article or interview in which she stated it. I have a Political Science paper due very soon. I would like to include the statement. Could you please send what information pertaining to my e-mail address at:
sheila_0123@yahoo.com
As for the premise of giving every baby born in America $5,000...is that over the course of a lifetime?
Afta Nafta...the economic standards may have changed.
2007-09-28 16:46:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
She doesnt seem to realize how stupid Americans are. People would start cranking out the babies just to get the check.
On the other hand, it wouldnt cost that much. If Bush had given out cash instead of invading Iraq, he could have given about $5,000 to every American under age 20, and had plenty left over.
2007-09-28 16:40:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Let's see... 40 cents per day @ 365 days per year multiplied by the average number of years for working at 40 years...
$5,840 per lifetime...
Wow, our standards could be similar to those of Cancun, Mexico...in 1994. Dare we think so positively?!
2007-09-28 16:56:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They do it here in Australia, and I'm telling you its not a good idea. It just encourages the wrong sort of people to keep on having babies.
2007-09-29 18:06:05 · answer #7 · answered by Krissie 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, more retarded leftwing "ideas"
She should resign her Senate seat and go live in Europe with the rest of the lousy socialists
2007-09-28 16:47:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I never heard that, but I hope she'll consider giving it to me. I could use the money.
Wow, my twin brother is here too.
2007-09-28 16:39:05 · answer #9 · answered by majnun99 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Payment for future tax revenue in advance?
2007-09-28 16:38:22 · answer #10 · answered by bobanalyst 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋