Clarification/Follow-up by paraclete on 09/29/07 5:32 am:
Tropo I didn't think the point would be lost on you. When you give a baby bonus what happens, the people who have the most children, and ergo, the least money, suddenly have disposable income and what do they spend it on? all the things they can't afford, so retail gets a boost, the economy gets a boost, and the poor get a boost, the kids are better looked after. This translates into taxable income and part of it flows back into the Treasury. If you understood economics you would know that it generates a net gain because the economy is stimulated.

I don't need to use statistics I just use observation and see the thinking put into action. The people receiving that bonus won't save it, they will spend it, and it will be in the hands of those who need it most

Clarification/Follow-up by tropicalstorm on 09/29/07 6:45 pm:
Paraclete
That is the 'theory' on welfare participants
that they spend it and help boost the economy BUT all you hear are the people complaining how it is their hard earned dollars that paid for 'them' to have something they didn't earn and
I really don't see where the money would come from other than higher taxes because that is how our government solves everything.

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 09/29/07 8:31 pm:
Clete we already have that written into our tax code. It is called the Child Tax Credit . It amounts to a tax credit of $1000 per qualified child EVERY YEAR .

Hillary's plan is different in that the money would go into savings that would grow. That is the best I can explain it because she tossed the idea out in a debate and the details are otherwise unknown.

Clarification/Follow-up by Fritzella on 09/29/07 9:06 pm:
Yeah, it would be a real good idea for American society to have people like Sapph pay a ****17% tax on food****, shoes, clothing, and everything else. Poor people paying an excessive amount of taxes...fodder for revolution not to mention immoral and greedy of the wealthy!!

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 09/30/07 11:39 am:
Programs to help kids that can't afford college make sense.But don't we already have tons of such programs, all of which have brought about such a federal subsidy racket that college costs go up faster each year ?

Hillary did make an inadvertent concession to the benefits of growth-oriented accounts (in Hillary's words "...a $5,000 account that will grow over time..."). Let her have that for funding education , but insist on expanding the concept to initiatives President Bush proposed include privatized Social Security, health-savings accounts and all the other features of an entitlement regime that will survive only if such principles gain the upper hand.

Clarification/Follow-up by tropicalstorm on 09/30/07 6:40 pm:
Choux
I do say I would like to see them go to the fair tax and do away with the tax system as it is and I am as poor as you can get in America