Hillary: ‘Send Babies to College’
September 28, 2007 on 1:03 pm | In Education, Main, National, Race for Prez |
Update noon Tuesday: According to First Read, “[HIllary’s] $5,000 “baby bonds” proposal may have given fodder to Republicans. “The baby bonds proposal is one of the few mistakes Hillary Clinton has made in her campaign,” said University of Virginia Professor Larry Sabato in the New York Times. ‘Should Clinton become the Democratic nominee, she may have handed a powerful issue to the Republican candidate.”
Update 7 a.m. Saturday: As usual, the NY Post has a hilarious take on this matter, including its estimated cost of $20 billion annually based on $5,000 times 4 million (the number of births per year).
* * * * * * * *
Well, not really … but did she actually say this? Give every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow and can be used later to pay for college?
As is often the case with such big-spending proposals, it appears she did not say how she would pay for it. Raise taxes on “the rich?” Restore tax rates to pre-Bush levels? I guess that would mean I will see an increase.
After all, I’m probably regarded by the IRS as rich since I live in Lakeville and own a home that’s increased substantially in value since I bought it five years ago. Heck, I can afford it. I don’t need to make that $100 annual gift to the Salisbury Ambulance Service. My son doesn’t need new soccer cleats. My daughter doesn’t really need dance lessons.
And I don’t need to squirrel money away for their higher education. I can fork more of my income over to the federal government so that someone else can save for college. It’s so simple. Why didn’t Hillary think of it before?
I have been watching with great interest Hillary’s remarkable transformation from arch lib to moderate. My central question has always been whether she is striking a pose or whether her evolution is genuine and would be reflected in the way she would govern as president.
Hillary has a tendency to hyperventilate before African American audiences. This latest pander bear proposal does not inspire great confidence that she’s truly evolved.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
Yes, we know how to spend your money better than you. That really is the whole point, is it not?
If you really wanted to fund your daughter’s dance lesson you’d find a way, just the same with the cleats. And you could drive to the hospital, could you not?
Hillary is a planner in the truest sense of the word her and her ilk can do better than you. You may think you know your needs better than Washington, but you are soooooo wrong.
This is great advice however for new grandparents, invest 5K$ in a no-load index mutual fund in your name with the grandchild listed. And don’t tell them!
What cracks me up is how she can endorse this kind of an investment, but not a plan to save Social Security? Go figure. The only democrat that scares me more is Edwards. I fear populists.
Comment by Bob — September 29, 2007 #
ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE UNBORN? Greg Mankiw has some questions about Hillary’s baby-bond proposal: “How might this be funded? There are only three groups that could be asked to pay for the new entitlement with higher taxes (or lower benefits): the current elderly, those currently of working age, or the same future generations who are getting the new benefit and are slated to pay for existing unfunded entitlements. Which group do you think Senator Clinton has in mind?”
Comment by Jake — September 29, 2007 #