The question that no Hillary Clinton Supporter will dare answer

[MannyGoldstein]

Referring to the horrific Gillenbrand bill that Bernie supports, to give new mothers three months paid leave after giving birth: How much will that raise the average person's taxes? Show us the money.

10%? 20%? How much does that crazed Socialist want to raise taxes so moms can be with newborns for a bit?

[Kalidurga]

1. It will raise them 100%.

That's what I heard anyway.

[Vincardog]

2. AVG $1.40 per week

40

[MannyGoldstein]

4. I think you accidentally added a decimal point

You must mean $140, no?

Only Republican loons would make that much stink over $1.40 a week for such a critical thing. Better check again.

[Vincardog]

15. from her web site it is $1.40 The loons will pitch a fit over everything. text below:

For example, the average woman worker earning the median weekly wage would only need to contribute $1.38 per week (for a total of $72.04 per year) into the program, and even the highest wage earners would have a maximum contribution of $4.36 per week, or $227.40 per year. This means that for less than ONE tall brewed Starbucks coffee ($1.85) or about the cost of ONE venti latte per week (over $4) we could create a program that will be so beneficial for our families. The average full time working woman earning the median weekly wage would receive a total of $5,514.48 if she took the full 12 weeks of paid leave. Operating the trust fund through the Social Security Administration would enable the program to capitalize on a number of administrative efficiencies thus decreasing the need to create new bureaucracies.

[Major Hogwash]

60. I'm not giving up my lattes!!!!

Not after what I read here last week!!!!

Haw haw haw!!!!!!!!

Volvos forever, too!

[Buzz Clik]

3. You want a HRC supporter to describe how Sanders proposes to raise money to fund that?

????

[Scootaloo]

6. Well, they're the ones all enraged by the proposal.

Manny (and the rest of us) want to know exactly what it is that has their ire.

[Buzz Clik]

7. Manny phrased it quit poorly with no context.

Not all of us spend 24/7 here hanging on every word.

Regardless: How this is getting funded is up to the sponsors of the bill, not HRC or her supporters.

[Kip Humphrey]

31. "not HRC or her supporters", and therein lay the difference between Bernie and Hillary.

Bernie will propose the bill; his supporters will organize to pressure Congressional elected officials to vote for it. At the end of the day, the full house of voters beats a flush of money donors every time.

[Buzz Clik]

36. You might recall the HRC is no longer in the Senate.

She no longer has the privilege to vote.

[Kip Humphrey]

39. Allow me to clarify for you...

Bernie will propose as president. Bernie's supporters will follow his leadership to pressure Congress to vote for it. Conversely, Hillary will take what she can get from a Congress under the influence of money.

[Buzz Clik]

61. Clarify? Wandering off on a tangent laced with insults will clarify nothing.

But, thanks for playing.

[jeff47]

32. He has proposed how to fund it. Clinton supporters are incensed by how much it costs

"middle class" taxpayers.

So how much is it gonna cost, if it's so awful? Seems kinda reasonable to expect people to understand what they're so upset about.

[Buzz Clik]

37. Again, Manny should include that info as part of the context.

As it stands, he is merely stirring the pot.

[jeff47]

38. Why? Manny didn't tell them before they became incensed at the proposal.

And such pragmatic realists would surely find out the cost before becoming incensed, right?

[Buzz Clik]

58. Good point.

Manny is gaining notoriety for mindless, pointless rants against HRC. Why change now?

[malokvale77]

47. Hmmm

Your pot certainly seems stirred.

[Buzz Clik]

59. (hee hee!)

After all, the sole point of this thread is the put chum in the water.

[sabrina 1]

5. Well, maybe I'm a crazed Socialist also. But what would childcare cost for those few months

Less than a small increase in taxes or more? I would rather pay a small tax increase and have babies with their moms.

And I would make it six months btw!

Corporations won't like it.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. In other countries

I had maternity leave for a year in UK - they paid full salary for the first few months.

[Chan790]

16. Finland even gives expectant mothers care-packages...

the purpose of which is to combat infant mortality and make sure that expectant mothers have the necessary goods to care for a child.

The crazy part is that pretty much everybody who looks at it concludes that it's ultimately an expense-saving measure for the government...that care-package lowers the cost to the state of newborn care by a lot more than the 140€ per baby it costs, primarily by encouraging women into pre-natal care by the 4th month of pregnancy in order to qualify for the package.

Edits: Many edits. My sleep-addled brain isn't functioning.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

21. Mid-wives came out to my house every day in the first couple of weeks

I had great post-natal care (and per-natal too) by the mid-wife team. My doctor visited too. This was all free at the point of use.

[jeff47]

35. As an added bonus, the box which holds that care package doubles as a crib. (nt)

[passiveporcupine]

40. One thing I love about those care packages

the box it comes in doubles as a safe 'new-born' crib for families who cannot afford one. That would be so great for poverty riddled women in this country.

[Art_from_Ark]

57. In Japan, it's not quite as generous

It starts 42 days before the due date (for a single birth) and extends for 56 days after the day after birth, with a target allowance of 2/3 of the working salary if the mother does not work during that time.

[pnwmom]

45. Hillary supports 12 weeks of paid family leave, and Gillenbrand has endorsed her. n/t

[Rosa Luxemburg]

62. not enough

[cantbeserious]

8. One Suspects - Today The Answer Is A - Tomorrow That Will Become B - Afterward C

[davidn3600]

9. From what I remember reading...

...I thought it was like 0.2% of wages or something.

I may be wrong on that or the proposal may have changed since I've read about it.

[Armstead]

10. Shhhhhh....don't say anything but...Gillibrand is a big Clinton supporter too

How nefarious

[Rose Siding]

11. Kirsten suggests .02%

The “Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act” or the FAMILY Act would create an independent trust fund within the Social Security Administration to collect fees and provide benefits. This trust would be funded by employee and employer contributions of 0.2 percent of wages each, creating a self-sufficient program that would not add to the federal budget. Benefit levels, based on existing successful state programs in New Jersey and California, would equal 66 percent of an individual’s typical monthly wages up to a capped monthly amount that would be indexed for inflation. The proposal makes leave available to every individual regardless of the size of their current employer and regardless of whether such individual is currently employed by an employer, self-employed or currently unemployed, as long as the person has sufficient earnings and work history. In this way it would apply to young, part-time and low-wage workers.

For example, the average woman worker earning the median weekly wage would only need to contribute $1.38 per week (for a total of $72.04 per year) into the program, and even the highest wage earners would have a maximum contribution of $4.36 per week, or $227.40 per year. This means that for less than ONE tall brewed Starbucks coffee ($1.85) or about the cost of ONE venti latte per week (over $4) we could create a program that will be so beneficial for our families. The average full time working woman earning the median weekly wage would receive a total of $5,514.48 if she took the full 12 weeks of paid leave. Operating the trust fund through the Social Security Administration would enable the program to capitalize on a number of administrative efficiencies thus decreasing the need to create new bureaucracies.

http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/issues/paid-family-medical-leave

Clinton supports it but her spokesman makes it sound as though the cost will be borne by upper income earners-

Clinton has long been supportive of a 12-week paid family leave program and has used the issue to repeatedly knock Republicans. But Clinton has not outright endorsed Gillibrand's bill and has only said she will detail her plan in the future.
"Hillary Clinton has already said she supports 12 weeks of paid family leave," a Clinton aide said Monday, "but she supports a different way to pay for it and so will be outlining additional ideas for ensuring the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-paid-leave/

[MannyGoldstein]

12. That can't be.

Why would anyone but a Republican loon get bent out of shape over that?

[Rose Siding]

20. Maybe this guy?

“While our people work longer hours for lower wages, almost all new income goes to the top one percent,” he continues. “My plan: Make Wall Street banks and the ultra-rich pay their fair share of taxes.” ... In another spot titled “A Rigged Economy,” Sanders says America’s finances are “held in place by corrupt politics where Wall Street banks and billionaires buy elections.”

Maybe instead of allowing the lower and middle class to be nickle and dimed to death with regressive taxation, a more progressive approach should be considered. I'm not really doing $4 coffee every week right now anyway.

[roguevalley]

27. bombs or babies? Anyone who opposes

babies isn't a dem. Period.

[BootinUp]

19. Guess Manny was wrong. Again. nt

[roguevalley]

28. how?

[BootinUp]

33. "The question that no Hillary Clinton Supporter will dare answer" nt

[JaneyVee]

14. What? Hillary supporters are all for paid leave.

Where did this come from?

[rhett o rick]

17. I can't imagine otherwise. It won't cost Goldman-Sachs a dime so why not favor it.

Go ahead and show him your links.

[JaneyVee]

18. Neither will single payer.

What will Goldman do with all those new profits?

[rhett o rick]

22. Goldman-Sachs and the billionaires are not just buying our presidency, they are even buying

control of our school boards. We must get money out of politics and voting for Goldman-Sachs won't do it.

I agree single payer won't hurt Goldman-Sachs business but it will hurt the huge insurance industry.

[JaneyVee]

26. Which employs a huge middle class.

How much will my taxes go up now to pay for millions of job losses? I hope Bernie's plan addresses this scenario.

[rhett o rick]

42. How does Goldman-Sachs buying candidates employ a huge middle class. If you had paid attention

for the last 40 years your friends in the 1% have been looting the middle class and working class. I guess that's ok with you. HRC is getting richer and richer from money from Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street. Why would she care about you?

[cui bono]

54. How much did they go up for Medicare?

I would like to see a citation regarding all those job losses due to single-payer health care.

[cui bono]

64. I was wondering if you could answer my questions...

Thanks!

[Bluenorthwest]

24. In the first link, you demand Sanders explain the detials of 'his plan'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251833663

Here's a link to a long thread of Hillary supporters bashing 'Bernie's Flat Tax to fund his revolution' which was in reality, the Family Leave Act....

The Revolution starts with a flat tax
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251701208


That's where people get the idea they oppose it, many have been railing against it for weeks and also claiming it is Bernie's idea, not Gillibrand's heavily co-sponsored Democratic bill.

[JaneyVee]

25. So not anyone in the campaign, just some folks on DU.

Ok. Some posters may need to get out of the DU bubble.

[rhett o rick]

43. I think you will be surprised that the Sanders supporters are passing out fliers and calling people

to get out the vote. You don't have to worry because you have the billionaires on your side. They can buy TV time and the corp-media is more than willing to help the corp-candidate.

I am going door to door right now. We need to get the big money out of politics.

[malokvale77]

48. "Ok. Some posters may need to get out of the DU bubble."

Funny coming from you. We joined DU a month apart. One of us sure has racked up a lot of posts. Hint --- it isn't me.

[AgingAmerican]

23. About 30$ per year

"Only about 12 percent of the workforce has access to paid family leave." Yet such leave can be provided at no financial cost to corporations and minimal cost to taxpayers. California and New Jersey provide 3 months of paid leave through a social insurance scheme that costs roughly $30 a year per taxpayer."

www.motherjones.com/politics/2006/09/just-try-voting-here-11-americas-worst-places-cast-ballot-or-try

[patsimp]

29. no idea - depends on many factors

[sarge43]

30. I'm guessing no more than funding that flying bottomless money pit aka the F-35 for a day. n/t

[George II]

34. What's the point of this post?

[randome]

41. Dredge the bottom of the barrel and you'll find...

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

46. That's for sure, Bernie's increasing success sure has cause a lot of

anger and sour grapes. He'll be a fantastic President!

[pnwmom]

44. Here's the answer: Hillary supports 12 weeks of paid family leave, just like Gillenbrand,

who supports Hillary's candidacy, by the way.

She just thinks there could be a better way of paying for it than by raising the taxes on the middle class.

None of the candidates, including Bernie, have released all of the details of how they plan to carry out all of their policies and proposals.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-paid-leave/

Clinton has long been supportive of a 12-week paid family leave program and has used the issue to repeatedly knock Republicans. But Clinton has not outright endorsed Gillibrand's bill and has only said she will detail her plan in the future.

"Hillary Clinton has already said she supports 12 weeks of paid family leave," a Clinton aide said Monday, "but she supports a different way to pay for it and so will be outlining additional ideas for ensuring the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share."

But that hasn't stopped Clinton from touting Gillibrand's efforts on paid family leave.

At the first Democratic debate in October, Clinton name-checked Gillibrand, who has endorsed her campaign and attended the debate on her behalf.

[malokvale77]

50. Knowing Hillary...

she'll want to pay for it with more "welfare reform".

No thanks, I'll pass.

[riversedge]

51. By your comments, you do NOT know Hillary.

[malokvale77]

52. I can say the same of you. nt

[BainsBane]

49. It's not horrific

but it is a regressive tax. The amount is .02%, I believe.

[cui bono]

53. If Sanders is such a crazed socialist, why aren't fathers getting paternity leave?

In Denmark, my cousins both got 6 months leave each, the mom and the dad.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

63. Yes there should be paternity leave and maternity

[akbacchus_BC]

55. It will not cost taxpayers a dime for a new mom to stay home

for three months after giving birth. It will be covered in the new mom's medical coverage. Sheesh, how hard is that for you to understand.

Even in third world countries, new moms get 13 weeks of pay in total, 6 weeks before, one week for the birth and 6 weeks after.

In Canada, a new mom can stay home for a year but taxpayers are not billed, there is provision in our medical insurance, the employer pays 50% for a year and the government pays 50% to top it off but the total is never the amount that the new mom earns at her work place, it is significantly lower.

[McCamy Taylor]

56. Huh? Why does Clinton have to tell us how Sanders will fund his own initiative?

Let him hire his own bean counters.