The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

So Hillary wants to buy votes at 5000 per baby, and Edwards thinks that soon all young African-American men will be dead or in prison. As noted in the link, there are more African-American men in college than in prison, and of the typical college ages of 18-24, the number of African-American men in college vs. those in prison is 4 to 1. Can you say race baiting trash?

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

So Hillary wants to buy votes at 5000 per baby

Well with the population crisis hitting Western Europe and Japan right now(Canada and the US are not too far behind either) I can see how this idea might gain some traction(the idealist in me is opposed to this but the realist in me can see some positives) as it does sorta reward making babies(although the reward is to the baby not the baby maker).

[MouseWife]

Oh, isn't that a grand idea. What about the issue of people dropping babies inside the U.S. so that they can be citizens and then collect monies for them? {border town resident speaking here} Won't this only make it that much worse? Not only the $5,000 to kick things off but then also the social services provided for them? And, I don't know if it would work if the parents would claim it as they file their income tax, some how making sure their parents actually are citizens or something to that effect.

What a mess and you can't really blame those who take advantage of the situation; the loopholes need to be fixed and certain actions not tolerated {like the woman who hid in the church and then said the U.S. was unkind or something....even after it was revealed that she was in the country illegally, worked with a fake social security number, basically disrespecting our laws and then she wants respect?}

Sorry if that is off topic, I only read the last couple of posts....

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

So Hillary wants to buy votes at 5000 per baby, and Edwards thinks that soon all young African-American men will be dead or in prison. As noted in the link, there are more African-American men in college than in prison, and of the typical college ages of 18-24, the number of African-American men in college vs. those in prison is 4 to 1. Can you say race baiting trash?

No.

Better data.

Even assuming that the ratio in the National Review article is correct, the ratio of white men in college to white men in prison would be about 32 to one. Common sense suggests that it's far higher.

[scaeagles]

In the data you site, there are 3.1% of the African American male population is in prison. This is a far, far cry from all being dead or in prison. It is race baiting, completely and totally.

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

In the data you site, there are 3.1% of the African American male population is in prison. This is a far, far cry from all being dead or in prison. It is race baiting, completely and totally.

True, but it's still not a good statistic, and the sevenfold disparity between whites and blacks is not de minimis. Plus, although I don't have the statistic at my fingertips, I believe the more alarming--if one is disposed to be alarmed--statistic is the number/percentage of black men under supervision, i.e., in prison, on probation or on parole.

[scaeagles]

In thinking about this whole Hillary 5000 per baby thing, it really, really angers me. The reason? It costs nothing during her Presidency.

I admit I am no expert in the bond market or how they work, so it is possible I'm missing something.

Issuing a 5000 bond costs nothing. When it matures and comes due 18 years later when she is long gone, each of those bonds will probably be worth something like 12000 (that assumes a rate of around 5% compounding annually). I find it morally repugnant to promose a new entitlement program that will have no impact in terms of cost or the books (again, figuring it will be kept off the books like social security is) during her administration (should she be elected).

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

In thinking about this whole Hillary 5000 per baby thing, it really, really angers me. The reason? It costs nothing during her Presidency.

I admit I am no expert in the bond market or how they work, so it is possible I'm missing something.

Issuing a 5000 bond costs nothing. When it matures and comes due 18 years later when she is long gone, each of those bonds will probably be worth something like 12000 (that assumes a rate of around 5% compounding annually). I find it morally repugnant to promose a new entitlement program that will have no impact in terms of cost or the books (again, figuring it will be kept off the books like social security is) during her administration (should she be elected).

I don't think that's right. Someone has to purchase the original bond. Typically it's the individual who pays the base price of the bond. Under the Hillary plan the initial $5,000 still has to be paid, it's just the cash is coming from the Government not you (Which of course really means from you.)

It's Nanny government at it's best. Now the all caring Government will watch after you directly from birth all the way through retirement. How sweet.


Oh and don't forget to translate the propsal from Hillary speak...

"I like the idea" = "I'm just saying I like it, I'm not promising anything"

"A $5,000 bond" = "Of course I'm not saying where the $5,000 would come from, perhaps the babies parents?"

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

I don't think that's right. Someone has to purchase the original bond. Typically it's the individual who pays the base price of the bond. Under the Hillary plan the initial $5,000 still has to be paid, it's just the cash is coming from the Government not you (Which of course really means from you.)

Makes sense, but if the government issues a government bond to someone, do they have to put up the 5000 upfront into some account, or is it just a promissary note to give out the money to the bearer once it matures?