by Big Dog on Sep 28, 2007 at 18:29 Uncategorized
Hillary Rodham said that each child born in the US should receive a $5000 bond that will accrue while the child ages and will be turned over to the child for college or a down payment on a first home. This is more socialized clap trap and involves the government in our lives even more. Pathetically, it involves our children from the day of their birth and makes them part of the nanny state from day one. The federal government runs Social Security and it has been a tremendous failure that keeps the elderly who were not able to save, in the poor house.
There are problems with this idea right from the start. Where will this money come from and will it be placed in a dedicated account? The first answer is obviously the taxpayer, who will be forced to foot the bill for someone else’s education or home down payment. The second is probably a flat out no. This means a $5000 IOU will mature and accrue interest and then the government will have to come up with a way to pay out. If they decide to place the money in an account and it is not dedicated to the child AND ONLY THE CHILD then the government will rape that account as it has done to SS for the last three or four decades.
What rules will be placed? Will the government decide that children from wealthy families may not have the bond because they should be able to pay their own way? What happens if the child dies before the bond is paid out? These, and many more, are questions that should be asked long before we allow them to do this because they have a terrible history of handling money and when they take it from you it is no longer yours. If we were allowed to have Social Security deductions (our money) go into our own accounts that could not be touched by the government then they might have more credibility. I don’t like it either way because I think that people should be responsible for their own retirement savings and not live off the hard work of others.
This is the other issue I have with these baby bonds. It is not the job of government to provide education or house payments and using a redistribution of our wealth to do it is socialism plain and simple. If the government wants to make it easier for people to save for their children’s education or house payment then perhaps they could stop taxing the hell out of us and let us invest our own money and take care of our own needs. Between the federal government and the states we pay a high percentage of our earnings in taxes. Let us keep more of that money and invest it.
Hillary is a socialist and she wants big brother to take care of all the minions. It guarantees successive generations of poor voters who will vote to keep Democrats in office so they can have more hand outs. Perhaps by cutting our taxes (and that means reigning in the spending) people will be able to put more away.
Cutting off federal programs that give money away will force them to do it. Once they learn not to depend on the government and to save, they will enjoy the freedom.
Sometimes unrelated trackbacks to: Stop the ACLU, Perri Nelson’s Website, 123beta, guerrilla radio, Adam’s Blog, Stix Blog, Nuke’s News & Views, Webloggin, Stuck On Stupid, Cao’s Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.Follow @onebigdog
Print This Post