Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/03/2018 6:51:13 AM PST by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: reaganaut1

I’m for months of parental leave for the father and the mother from the birth of each baby forward.


47 posted on 02/03/2018 10:00:46 AM PST by Architect of Avalon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

If there was gov’t mandated paid leave for up to 12 or 16 weeks, you would see a lot of small companies hire only men or very very few women of child baring age.
You would also see a lot more H1B visa applications if the company is primarily in the STEM industry.

Using Social Security for yet another non-retirement program is bad. The idea will never be “revenue neutral” no matter what number you try to run out into the future. Expenditures now for promises in the future NEVER workout.


51 posted on 02/03/2018 10:14:48 AM PST by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

If it must exist, paid family leave must require one of the two spouses work contributing to both fed and state.

Also, a percentage of earnings should be held in escrow, and should the employee fail to return, the escrow is forfeited back to the company.

On the hand, the Country needs babies born into responsible families. We can’t be trading abortions/delays for illegals.


60 posted on 02/03/2018 7:45:06 PM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

It’s incredible to me that this could even be a question among people who call themselves conservative.


61 posted on 02/03/2018 8:29:15 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

The rampant abuse that already exists for family medical leave is a clear sign that the same people will abuse this too. How many people are sitting at home, taking tax dollars now? It was 49 percent. Now I bet it is at least 51 percent. But, o they earned it, just ask them.


62 posted on 02/04/2018 3:42:57 AM PST by momincombatboots (No Wall, No Way 2018.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

No it’s a horrible idea—and we have liberal Manhattanite Ivanka responsible for Trump now pushing it.

Already we got a terrible childcare entitlement that will be soaked up by the rich with nannies.

Not good for the kiddos, not good for the country, evil for the already overburdened taxpayers.


65 posted on 02/04/2018 5:55:39 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
They would allow prospective parents to collect Social Security benefits for a period of time (probably 12 weeks) upon the birth of the child, but offset that by delaying their eligibility for Social Security benefits upon retirement
This is a racist idea, designed to deny retirement to certain races that tend to breed a lot./sarc
73 posted on 02/04/2018 1:31:33 PM PST by Aut Pax Aut Bellum (Stay Calm and Carry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson