This was released when he was out of the country, and it does not appear like the administration is defending it. It looks to me like reverse Robin Hood. The super rich get rich, middle class continues the downward slide and poor and lower middle class get screwed.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/16/news...ans/index.html
It includes a new social welfare program that pays parents for 6 weeks of maternity/paternity leave.
I hope Paul Ryan stops this in its tracks.
do you think that six weeks paid maternity leave is wrong? What do you think of the rest of the budget?Originally Posted by iris lilies
6 weeks, 18 Weeks, two years paid maternity leave, I dont care. As long as the taxpayers arent made to pay for it, it doesnt matter to me. This Democrat in the
White House wants Nanny G. to cough up the money, though.
I like the nod to balancing the U.S. Bidget evenif it is pie in the sky. I am glad someone is talking about it.
Selling off petroleum reserves might well be a good idea.
Last edited by iris lilies; 5-24-17 at 12:28am.
In Norway, you get 46 weeks of parental leave. Iceland, 9 months. Sweden ~16 months. Finland 2-6 months or so.
I just got back from several months in these countries. Lovely places. I enjoyed seeing lots of dads out with their new kids, during the work day, all over the place. I think it is wonderful.
I had the threaten my previous employer with a lawsuit from some very nasty people to get my lawfully-entitled time when my daughter was born, here in the USA.
I am removed from childbearing years many moons ago. I am at a loss on why others would need to pay for someone(s) else's choice to have baby. Plan, Save, Prepare are novel ideas in general. I was young and did not plan a baby, yet the second I found out the planning and saving of the tiny pennies began, knowing I had to be off work. Time off is different then paid time off. Go to WM here and you can see dad's with the kids all work day long, probably not for the same reason though.
I guess I am not versed in much that the budget includes or does not include. Same as most I imagine "as long as it does not affect my concerns". I have a son on disability, so yes I am watching this entire process with stress. I do not have the answers.
I pay for libraries that I don't use. And highways. And parks. And schools. Because I use kindle and I homeschooled and I don't like to drive ...
I love and kiss and feed and change diapers and buy gifts for my foster grandchildren just as I do for my bio grandchildren.
I would love to pay for parental leave for new families. This is the heart of being civilized -- Caring about the group and not just oneself.
Would the taxpayers actually be paying for parental leave in this budget, or are they just imposing an unfunded mandate on employers?
+1
It is also much more cost efficient in the long run to invest in healthy family structures than to pay for problems down the road.
I don't have a strong opinion on parental leave, at least relative to the other changes, but the budget plus the any new tax reform looks like the reverse Robin Hood effect to me. It does look like it is leaving Medicare and SS alone, but Ryan will probably push for changes to that. My biggest beef is the cutbacks in government funded scientific research and environmental projects. What ever cuts are in the plans seem to be offset by spending on military and I'm sure the DOJ will be loading up the prisons with low level drug offenders, deporting illegal immigrants, and building the wall. Here's a list of the 66 programs that will have cutbacks. Some I could agree with, but most not.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/33...-trumps-budget
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote