Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Free Childcare! From a Republican!
Donald Trump has figured out suburban women. He is going to guarantee six weeks of paid maternity leave for every new American mom. And if we vote for this compassionate man, we’ll also get tax credits for daycare and the government will help us set up “dependent care savings accounts” to support future generations from cradle to grave. Soon, all our of kids will have trust funds as big as Ivanka’s.
Provide 6 weeks of maternity leave to new mothers – The United States is the only developed country that does not provide cash benefits for new mothers. According to the U.S. Department of Labor: “Only 12 percent of U.S. private sector workers have access to paid family leave through their employer.” Each year, 1.4 million women who work give birth without any paid leave from their employer. The Trump plan will enhance Unemployment Insurance (UI) to include 6 weeks of paid leave for new mothers so that they can take time off of work after having a baby. This would triple the average 2 weeks of paid leave received by new mothers, which will benefit both the mother and the child.
That’s so awesome. Why has no one ever thought of this sort of initiative before? Ummm… wait. They have: They’re called progressive Democrats. And I’m a Republican woman because I have long-spurned policies that sound good but lead to rational discrimination, new entitlements, and exploding debt that will crush future generations.
Look, I understand kids are expensive. I’ve struggled in the past with childcare costs. I actually set up my very own “dependent care savings account” with the spare change I earned as a waitress when I was a young, single mom. (The bills that folded went to bills, you see; nickels and dimes went into the college fund.)
So, how can I explain my reaction to this latest proposal? It’s like when I was handed a New Coke as a kid. “It’s a better formula,” they said as I spat it out onto the sidewalk. I remember thinking that, if I wanted something that tasted like Pepsi, I would have just bought a Pepsi. Is that a hard concept for a businessman to understand?
Just asking.
Published in General
It did. I , however am not a small government purist. I dislike the GOPe because they sold out their voters to donors who I believe are against to best interest of the country.
And your thoughts as Trump sells out those voters?
\sarcasm{Fairness!}
Where would we be without these people to turn us into an overregulated European social democracy?
You call it a sell out. You never bought in , so how can you be sold out?
This proposal has not been hidden from view, it is part of the package. I voted for W , including the compassionate conservatism. He did not sell me out.
This was even brought up at the convention. Why the angst about it now?
You have a weird concept of ‘selling out’.
Conservative purists never bought in, Frank. They took their marbles and went to the treehouse. Save me the faux anger and righteousness.
Trump is not a conservative purist. Alert the media.
What philosophy lead you to support Republicans over Democrats?
You are not the conservative base, TKC. Trump’s voters overwhelmingly didn’t support these measures when pulling the level for him in the primaries. He is selling them out in the general as predicted. Shouldn’t this win him the same ire from you, as you claim it is not what the GOPe believes that bothers you, but that they sell out their voters?
There you go, FIFY.
What’s the point of beating the Democrats if we’re just going to propose Democrat policies
This reminds me of something. A few decades ago, sisters Pam Young and Peggy Jones, aka the slob sisters, were on a daytime talk show. They were showing how to can jelly. They boiled the labels off store bought, put their own on (with cute little fabric “hats” on the jar lids) and viola! Homemade jelly.
You’re referring here to immigration policy and trade deals, I presume? Are there other issues where you think the interests of the donors are opposed to the interests of the voters?
Sugar subsidies, Ex-Im bank , I could go on
Remember when Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity used to make fun of people who supported state-mandated maternity leave? Twitter does:
https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/557729254314881026
Ahh, January of 2015! It was such an innocent, pure time. I still remember it fondly, when it looked like conservatism was about to have its best shot of getting a real conservative elected President without, for once, being told we had to water everything down to appeal to the [CoC] independents and moderates.
And what pundit promised you that?
No pundit promised me that. I was saying back then that we had such a shot. I was gleeful that the only two plausible Democratic nominees (Bernie and Hillary) were so radical and so disliked, respectively, that we were finally going to have a comfortable margin of victory without the panicked consultants having any plausible arguments to make for the moderate RINO squish. I was sitting around, smug and satisfied with our excellent chances with any one of a half-dozen young conservatives in the lead.
And then this happened. And now we’ve blown it. The conservative movement is corrupting itself, and “our” easy shot at the White House is down to discussions of “he’s not really that far behind, you know!”
To heck with this election cycle.
Isn’t Ex-Im bank basically a trade deal issue? I don’t really know what Ex-Im bank is, or why people are so upset about it.
Orthodox Arthritis, Reformed.
And you know this from where? Usual sources?
A Charlotte “conservative” talk-show host in two tweets:
YCHHAG
yeah, but trump only promised 6 weeks, not three months.
Well, I was close. Relevant portion below, but as they say, Read The Whole Thing.
It does makes one’s head spin.
Geesh.
I wish someone would study how far elected officials drift from their campaign promises.
I remember Rush Limbaugh’s list of Clinton’s hundred campaign promises.
Someone needs to do more of that.
Thank you!
It did. I was a part of the very early Tea Party. I don’t know what this nonsense is. It’s not small government conservatism though. I’m not sure how many “Tea Party” people crossed over to now pushing a new entitlement program, but I do know a lot of us are still pretty much the same.
Much of the TEA Party lost its way when it broadened its focus from taxes and spending.
I’m voting for Trump – and I mean FOR him (not AGAINST Hillary), but this is literally the worst argument for doing so. If that’s so, what exactly was wrong with Jeb, Romney, et. al?
This isn’t subsidizing bastardy. This applies equally to married couples and single mothers. WIC subsidizes bastardy by paying a household of 2 35% more money than a household of 1. What does that mean? That it is far more lucrative for the mother to remain single than for her to get married ($21,000 for 1 vs $15,000 each for 2).
This does bother my “small-government” sensibilities. However, I have heard on THIS VERY SITE that we need immigration because of poor replacement rates. We were not the only country suffering from poor replacement rates and other countries have corrected for it by offering more incentive to reproduce by reducing the burden of reproducing. Cost of childcare is a strong motivator not to have kids. It is expensive and for many, the cost of living is too high (or their set lifestyle after 15 years of being DINKs) makes it difficult to give up one income. (continued)
(continued)
This may not be conservative, but it is in keeping with Trump’s overall message this cycle of Making America Great Again by focusing on US citizens and reducing our dependency on foreign labor. In that, he is being consistent.
This is a bit different than simple bonding. There may be some incentive to encourage breastfeeding as well. It would be more cost efficient if women who want to to be able to do so. It takes 6 weeks of feeding every 2-3hours to establish a milk supply that can then be pumped. Also, maternal bonding helps decrease post-partum depression (dads don’t get this…)
Many women can not afford to breastfeed. Silly? I mean its FREE. The very definition of the word! But low-income families can’t afford to take 6 weeks off of work with no pay. They can barely afford 2 weeks and immediately head back off to work.
Government intervention is not the ideal way to deal with this. The IDEAL way would be to somehow make it possible to maintain a stable lifestyle on one income. This solves every single issue at play here. But no body thinks THAT is a good idea or even feasible.
Correction – Childcare is EXTREMELY expensive.
As to giving up one income, there’s a bit more to it than that. You can’t forget the state of the economy the past many years. In my wife’s case, she has A: No College Degree, and b: 20 years with the same company (at the time our first was born). If she had dropped out of the workforce for 5-8 years, there’s pretty much zero chance she would have ever been able to get back in at anything like the level she had before.
I used to HATE when Rush called all Democrats liars. Why? Because the Republicans were lying, too.
All you people thinking Trump is lying misses that he hasn’t actually CLAIMED to be a conservative Republican. (I’m supposed to believe he’s a lifetime Democrat even though he was a Republican in the 80’s and supported Reagan).
McCain? He DID. Just so we would vote for him. It just so happens that after being lied to enough and getting big government in spite my support, I’m going to stop listening to claims of “small government”. I mean, look at the Libertarian Party. No one is selling small government. They were all liars. So my second recourse is to bet on the one who is pushing big government policies that don’t make conservatism completely impossible for the future by conserving our country… Immigration is my #1 issue. If its not yours, fine. It is mine. Trump did more to push that narrative than anyone else on the field (everyone thought it a losing issue until Trump started winning on it).
Also, Trump has no axe to grind against Christians and small-government conservatives. Unlike Hillary. Unlike Obama.