September 29, 2007

Hillary! Economic Genius [AndrewsDad]
— Open Blog

Hillary Clinton suggests $5,000 savings bond for every U.S. baby

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that every child born in the United States should get a $5,000 "baby bond" from the government to help pay for future costs of college or buying a home.

...

"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so that when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college or maybe they will be able to make that down payment on their first home," she said.

...

"I think it's a wonderful idea," said Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, an Ohio Democrat who attended the event and has already endorsed Clinton. "Every child born in the United States today owes $27,000 on the national debt, why not let them come get $5,000 to grow until their 18?"

Hell, why not give each kid an additional $27,000 on top of the $5,000 when they are born and then they will not owe anything.

A few minor issues I have with this idea after the jump

Personal Bleg:
I will now violate the first rule of blogging, know your audience.
If anyone has any personal experiance dealing with issues associated with gifted children, I would love to hear.
andrews-dad AT hotmail DOT com [John McLaughlin Voice On]
Issue 1
4 million kids a year, $5,000 per kid, if my math degree still works, that is 20 billion per year. Did the governmet get a new job with a big raise recently?

Issue 2
"Every child born in the United States". Every child? Even the ones whose parents are uninvited guests?

Issue 3
A $5,000 bond is going to pay for college or be a down payment on a house 20 years later? Can someone explain the concept of inflation, interest and future value to the Senator?

Issue 4
Is the savings bond fairy going to print and deliver the bonds and administer this new government program or will there be some administrative overhead?

On a scale of 0 to 10--with 0 representing zero possibility and 10 representing metaphysical certitude--what is the chance of this proposal being adopted?
PAT BUCHANNAN!
[John McLaughlin Voice Off]

Posted by: Open Blog at 09:24 AM | Comments (50)
Post contains 383 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Great!  I was born in the United States!  Crazy bond money, here I come!

Posted by: See-Dubya at September 29, 2007 09:31 AM (1gdFs)

2

As long as we're talking about spending other people's money, if I had 20 billion of your money to spend for a government program under the guise of our children's education, I would use it to build trade schools across the country where tens of thousands could attend for free.  I figure if we can teach carpentry, tile setting, cabinet making, etc. , I wouldn't have to learn spainish and it would dry up the illegal alien job market.


Kids just don't want to learn trades these days. They would rather work for minimum wage in a mall instead.


Posted by: alabaster jones at September 29, 2007 09:36 AM (GczzL)

3

Hear, hear, Jones.


She really is targeting a rather ignorant voting bloc with this one.  Patronizing sow.


Posted by: MDH at September 29, 2007 09:48 AM (JODil)

4 "Kids just don't want to learn trades these days. They would rather work for minimum wage in a mall instead."

Silly...if this article has taught you anything, it's that Americans don't care WHAT jobs people have, as long as they personally don't have to work and can live off the toil of others.

Posted by: Grimaldi at September 29, 2007 09:50 AM (Rx9GP)

5 Hillary! pandering? Nah, couldn't be! Hey, Hillary!, will this be like, retroactive? If a 25 yr old can get medical coverage as a 'child', can my two adult kids get those bonds?

Posted by: GarandFan at September 29, 2007 09:51 AM (+tCxF)

6 She may be a patronizing sow but there are an awful lot of willing teat suckers out there.

Posted by: ricpic at September 29, 2007 09:53 AM (tng3f)

7 The socialists think we are on the run and are coming out of hiding.

Posted by: MlR at September 29, 2007 09:53 AM (mX6h5)

8

"their 18" = "they're 18"


AP should go ahead and hire an editor instead of depending on writers to know the difference.


Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at September 29, 2007 10:02 AM (/rgAZ)

9 Trade schools are a very good idea.

Posted by: meep at September 29, 2007 10:03 AM (6qqHG)

10 BTW, a-d, I sent you an email regarding the personal bleg.

Posted by: meep at September 29, 2007 10:04 AM (6qqHG)

11 Here's a little math for the fun of it.

Let's take the next 25 years. 20 billion a year X 25 years is a half a trillion dollars. 25 years from now, the first batch of kids that received the five grand will be entering the work force. The rest of us will be leaving it and collecting social security. The kids that received a whopping five G's will be the first ones on the hook to pay for the entitlements of retirees, the tab for the last 25 years of this mess, and the will also be paying for the next group of babies born. Their tax rate should be about 92%.

Not bad when that five thousand dollar gift only paid for one semester of Chicano Feminist Lesbian Studies.

One other thing. Hillary seems to think we can do OK if we give these kids money and it gets put into interest bearing bonds. But none of the Dems would allow the same freedom when it comes to letting me invest my Social Security. Then they think we are too stupid to handle our own money, bet we will do better with someone elses.

Well, it works for Washington.

Posted by: MagicalPat at September 29, 2007 10:07 AM (O7Khc)

12 Where the money will come from to fund her bold incentive is
unimportant, but I am sure none of us would object to a modest tax
increase for a group of people that Hillary has demonized.


Let's spin the Wacky Wheel of Hate, shall we? Round
and round she goes..where she stops, nobody knows! Who gets to foot the
bill for Hillary's brilliant savings bond idea? Christian
Conservatives? Nope. Big Oil? Nope. The Boy Scouts?



...and the winner is RICH PEOPLE! For far too long, the wealthy elite have used their ill-gotten wealth to selfishly pay for the education of their own
little snots, while their less fortunate neighbor kids are left out in
the cold, where they ultimately freeze to death while George Bush
laughs maniacally from the warm comfort of his palatial Crawford estate.
from BlameBush!

Posted by: z ryan at September 29, 2007 10:23 AM (PDeVA)

13 Come on, people, only a heartless fascist could possibly be opposed to this. Think of the children!




Also, because this bugged me worst:



"Every child born in the United States today owes $27,000 on the national debt, why not let them come get $5,000 to grow until their [sic] 18?"



So, let me see if I have this right. The government will levy taxes on the population, then issue a debt instrument with a principal of five thousand to each newborn child, so that the government can then levy taxes on what it pays out on said debt instrument in the future in order to pay off the national debt. By that logic, we should give every child a five million dollar government bond. Then we can pay off the national debt in eighteen years!



Or, ya know, if you were actually serious about paying off the national debt, you could either take the money from the "newborn tax" and just use it to pay down the debt, or you could (snort, laugh) just spend less and put the remaining revenue towards the debt. But that wouldn't be for the children.

Posted by: Slowking Man at September 29, 2007 10:27 AM (XFjaO)

14 Ace: off topic, but along the lines of "not yet figured it out", I was reading about trends in college admissions and came across Greatschools.net comments in which it noted that males made up a diminishing % of admitted students (45% male and 55% females), but said it was o.k. because there were more males admitted than years ago. Later the article then wondered why the U.S. has fallen to seventh in the world in % of population with college degrees. I'm sure the fall off of  percentage of males entering college has nothing to do with it. Duh.

Posted by: hammy at September 29, 2007 10:31 AM (bBQGz)

15 Andrew's Dad, you cast my mind back some number of years to one of my favorite SNL bits. Just keep in mind that all the talk about Bush and Iraq refers to the first Bush, and the first Gulf War.  www.tinyurl.com/2crssx

Posted by: Lord Floppington at September 29, 2007 10:32 AM (4gHqM)

16 A college education is overrated. I am living proof of that.

Posted by: Steve (the artist formerly known as Ed Snate) at September 29, 2007 10:41 AM (fIA9x)

17

Lord Floppington,


That is my favorite SNL bit of all time.  Which says a lot about me.  There is another SNL McLaughlin group bit which features the man, the legend J.M himself.  Poor video and not nearly as funny as the one you posted.


AD


Posted by: Andrews Dad at September 29, 2007 10:43 AM (ZT8bq)

18

The funny part about this is I've seen lefties trying to compare it to the "tax refund" we got a few years ago.


It's obvious, giving money back to people who paid it in is exactly like giving money to people who won't start to put back in until after they've received the money (if at all).


The funniest part? You know they're going to tax the interest on those payoffs so the kid would most likely end up with less money, inflationally speaking, than the $5K he started with.


And that's funny on so many levels.


 


Posted by: Veeshir at September 29, 2007 10:50 AM (zXUuJ)

19 No problem Hillary -- we got your back.

Posted by: The Money Trees at September 29, 2007 11:01 AM (77M+c)

20 No, no, liberals aren't bugfuck insane, no, of course they're not.

{/sarc}

Actually, what worries me most are:

1) That this idea got past their "internal censors" who should be doing things like taking a quick look at proposals to see if they make any sense at all, and

2) That some portion of their base actually seems to think this is a good idea.

Next, Hillary! will propose nationalizing food production.

Posted by: Merovign at September 29, 2007 11:04 AM (IaYDo)

21 I guess she read about the £80 bond we all got here for our newborns and used a microsoft program to convert it to dollars, or it is a freudian slip and she allowed for inflation on the $160 in the intervening period until the American people forgive her!!!

Posted by: chris edwards at September 29, 2007 11:07 AM (7Kaal)

22 My kids had this 15-20 years ago...I set up accounts for them, with my own money, of my own volition. What a concept.

Sadly, they are being penalized for this now, as there is no college financial aid available for those who started saving for their children when they were born.

Posted by: cdeegan at September 29, 2007 11:13 AM (4SOCe)

23 If she means EVERY child heck I know I will claim it, and I am 34. I was born in this country. This will send the debt through the roof.

Posted by: Patrick at September 29, 2007 11:15 AM (4ZezS)

24 To be accurate she didn't exactly endorse this, she agreed the idea was neat - and it wouldn't be every child, it would be for any kid that did military service or some Young Pioneers/Hitler Youth government program. Just to be accurate.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 29, 2007 11:29 AM (wmgz8)

25 Actually let me clarify: the question was about kids who did government service, but she implied it would be for anyone who graduates High School:


"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so that when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college or maybe they will be able to make that downpayment on their first home,"

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 29, 2007 11:42 AM (wmgz8)

26

Hillary! Economic Genius


I wouldn't go so far as to say that, but she is one of my better pupils at the moment.


Posted by: Karl Marx at September 29, 2007 12:00 PM (wkjFE)

27 I'm still fond of the idea of simply raising the minimum wage to $3 trillion/hour.

That way we can all work for about 2 seconds and then retire for the rest of our lives.

That would work, right?

Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at September 29, 2007 12:05 PM (NdG3x)

28
And $5000 for every Illegal too!  Yeah!

Obviously this is discrimination to only award free money to citizens.

Posted by: Electric Ferret at September 29, 2007 12:10 PM (+seyu)

29

You must learn to read parse when dealing with the clintons:


 so that when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school...


Technically everyone finishes HS. Some finish with a diploma, some without.


Posted by: Sticky B at September 29, 2007 12:11 PM (wkjFE)

30 I'm not gonna lie. If the government gave me $5000 with no strings attached, I'm spending it all on hookers.

And I'm sure I'm not the only one who would.

This is why socialism doesn't work.

Posted by: Joe at September 29, 2007 12:42 PM (i1jdV)

31 We finance this by selling 100-year treasury bonds.----then the damn Caliphate will have to pay it off.

Posted by: Kasper Hauser at September 29, 2007 12:43 PM (TnQKB)

32 Well I guess you could just not go to High School at all, my grandmother didn't. Then again, she was living on the ranch that the book My Friend Flicka took place on at the time.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 29, 2007 12:44 PM (wmgz8)

33

John McCain said in response to that on radio today "Gee, I wish I had thought of that.'


It made me laugh. The Dems promise the moon. Hillary will do whatever it takes to get elected.


Posted by: Rightwingsparkle at September 29, 2007 12:54 PM (PgxW1)

34

Damn it, Hillary, this five grand thing is bullshit!   Each father should get a hot Asian nanny and  each mother should get a new washer and drier.


 


Ow!   Ow!   Back off, bitch!


Posted by: Bill Clinton at September 29, 2007 12:55 PM (HlorC)

35 "I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account
that will grow over time, so that when that young person turns 18 if
they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to
college or maybe they will be able to make that down payment on their
first home,"


Well, I like the idea of giving every kid a $billion in cash and a new home and two vehicles!  I must be more compassionate than Hillary.

Posted by: Kevin at September 29, 2007 01:27 PM (f0QzP)

36 It may not be "gifted", but I'm pretty sure all of the morons here are "special".

Posted by: someone at September 29, 2007 02:30 PM (2z2WN)

37

While the case in point is another example of the government taking control of our lifes.  studies have shown that if at birth 5,000 was invested in the market when that baby retires  he will be a millioniare.   what this would mean is that for 5,000 dollars today the government can get rid of social security in 65 years.  Much like GM is doing with the UAW with healthcare.  Now who should fund this $5,000?  I say give it as a future tax break


 


Posted by: Bill at September 29, 2007 02:57 PM (ruilG)

38

This would get funny fast if Obama said he would give $5,050 to each child.


I wish they would actually do this with a random sample of 10,000 babies and then annually track and report on those 10,000 to see how much better they all turned out.


That would be an excellent illustration of the idiocy and ineffectiveness of socialism.


This has to be the dumbest proposal in a long, long time.


Posted by: Rosetta at September 29, 2007 03:13 PM (a6kuN)

39

"I think it's a wonderful idea," said Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones.  "Every child born in the United States today owes $27,000 on the national debt, why not let them come get $5,000 to grow until their 18?"


I'm assuming this financial wizard doesn't realize that the $5,000 plus interest will then be added to the $27,000?


Posted by: Rosetta at September 29, 2007 03:19 PM (a6kuN)

40 This one time, in math camp.....

Posted by: Stephanie Tubbs Jones at September 29, 2007 03:21 PM (a6kuN)

41 As the boys at Powerline Blog point out (when they aren't on their knees for McCain), Hillary's proposal is absolutely unoriginal. It's just George McGovern's "Demogrant" $1000 pander from 1972 all over again. And as John points out, when you factor in inflation over the past 35 years, $5000 today is pretty damned near $1000 in 1972 dollars.

Here's hoping she gets spanked as soundly as George did back then. But given the change in the electorate in the meantime, I wish I could be very confident that it'd happen.

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at September 29, 2007 03:26 PM (DQDJU)

42 I'm assuming this financial wizard doesn't realize that the $5,000 plus interest will then be added to the $27,000?


yeah that occurred to me as well, apparently that skated right over her head. Probably the compassionate tilt helped.


What if the government cut taxes enough that parents had 5k extra of their own money to spend? Wouldn't that be better?

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 29, 2007 03:42 PM (wmgz8)

43

Well the most obvious benifit is this:


Making babies for fun and profit! No not the old fashion way (get preggers, sue male for child support, 18 years of free money) Hillary! has a better plan!


Get preggers once a year, get $5000 from Uncle Sam, have a post-partum abortion (perfectly legal once Hillary! gets elected. 5th trimester abortions, no problem!) and get preggers agian asap.


Yeah Rosetta, they seem to imagine the money just falls off trees, not that all those multi-billion $$ pogroms er, programs actually need to be paid for by someone.


 


Posted by: 5Cats at September 29, 2007 03:51 PM (Knaf0)

44 Ooohhh, a bribe from Senator Sleazette. Can I sue her now?

Posted by: Hank Rearden at September 29, 2007 04:30 PM (ES4Ca)

45

I'm still fond of the idea of simply raising the minimum wage to $3 trillion/hour.

That way we can all work for about 2 seconds and then retire for the rest of our lives.

That would work, right?


Hahahahahahaha.


I vote for Dead Career Sketch for President!!


Can we make it $3 trillion/hour and sex with Heidi Klum.  Then I'll actually campaign for you.


Posted by: Rosetta at September 29, 2007 05:06 PM (omkIU)

46

Can we make it $3 trillion/hour and sex with Heidi Klum.  Then I'll actually campaign for you.


Rosetta is a lesbian? WTF?


 


 


 


Yes, I know he's a dude.


Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at September 29, 2007 06:16 PM (/rgAZ)

47

Further brilliant analysis HERE.


And digitalbrownshirt likes gay interracial midget animal porn.


Posted by: Rosetta at September 29, 2007 06:56 PM (omkIU)

48 Thank you for your support, Rosetta.

Let's make it Heidi Klum, Jessica Alba, and Angelina Jolie. For everybody! And a lifetime supply of Viagra to boot!

Plus, the sky will rain Bushmills 21 year old single malt, and hot crispy, bacon will grow on every bush.



Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at September 29, 2007 07:20 PM (NdG3x)

49

HA!


Can can we also have a free flying car, a unicorn, world peace and can it rain delicious cheese?


Posted by: Rosetta at September 29, 2007 07:32 PM (omkIU)

50 Okay, now here are some good points in this idea's favor:

1. Only kids get it - i.e. liberal gay couples without any kids will be paying for this plan more than others. That's good since they didn't breed any workers to help pay for the SS they should be coughing up for other people's kids.

2. It allows us to ask Hillary this kind of question:

"Why do you think newborns would be smart enough to invest their baby bonds correctly as a private accounts while adults are not smart enough to control their own social security accounts?"

3. Technically the government could borrow at very low rates, and then these bonds can be made in stock accounts that earn more than the T-bills over the several decades before their use. Ideally, we make these baby bonds only be able to be withdrawn at 55 or something. Then we can cancel SS, right?

4. Would it be cheaper to offer Pell Grants and financial aid, or to say, "sorry, use your baby bond first." It might actually turn out to be cheaper?

Okay, this is just a bunch of vodka BS talking, especially any idea that there will be any tough rules applied or other bennies reduced.

Posted by: Aaron at September 30, 2007 05:50 AM (h+vr3)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
99kb generated in CPU 0.17, elapsed 1.2291 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.1529 seconds, 286 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.