She will almost certainly structure it as a zero coupon bond bomb that will explode long after she is gone....

What a desperate fraud she is. She will say anything and do what ever it takes to sit her socialist fat ass in the oval office. She deserves nothing more than spit in her phony face. She is an utterly repulsive human being.

Besides the inherent stupidity of this idea in any time or place, there's two more stupid things:

1. Anchor babies will have these. What's 12,000,000 times $5000?

2. The bureaucratic enforcement and law enforcement will triple the size of government.

Why do Soros and Clinton act like bad imitations of Ayn Rand villans? Because they don't teach capitalism in school anymore.

Talk about cradle to grave...when will people learn socialism is a disease that has to be killed off.

Reminds me of McGovernomics.

In 1972, George McGovern's big idea to "stimulate the economy" was for the federal government to give every man, woman, and child in America $1000. It would have been taxable income, so those in higher income brackets paying the top marginal rate would have given most of it back in taxes, while children and lower income people would get to keep it all.

According to The Inflation Calculator, $1000 in 1972 = $4808.90 in 2006 dollars (the last full year available), so Hillary's plan is close to George's.

Now, she does only say it will go to the "children," but watch how fast that expands . . . after all, why would newborns deserve it, when the poor one year-olds get nothing? and what of the much-maligned "terrible twos?" Before you know it, it will go to everyone under eighteen - and is likely to expand to cover full-time students and those in Americorps, too.

The idea there is some innate economic gain by taking money from one person and giving it to another is laughable. At the very least, you lose the administrative costs of the program and the collection costs of the funds - not to mention the lessened economic efficiency of any redistribution of wealth.

This, like welfare, won't possibly be abused.

It takes a Socialist ...

Balanced budget? What balanced budget?

The sad thing is, I really do believe your average American honestly believes this money just magically comes from the government, at no cost to them. Of course, this kind of thinking has yielded the current mentality on welfare and Social Security, so what is yet another nail in the coffin?

One almost has to wonder if her end goal really is simply nothing more than the complete and utter economic, society, and political destruction of America. Of course, this destruction will be allowed, if not outright encouraged, by the American public because it will be presented in the most cuddly, touchy-feely, "good of the people" context.

If it were not so diabolically sick, I would almost be proud of such a creatively sneaky and underhanded plan being the product of an American.

s/society/societal;

Too bloody late.

Not that I defend the "baby bond" idea, or Hillary, she said:

"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time...."

She likes the idea, it's utopic, not necessary plausible. I don't think she's going to do something like that, It's political suicide to state such a fact. Which she has not stated yet.
It's an interesting idea, but way to complicated to control, or to decide what is fair, it could be over exploited. Besides, there is no budget. It is a dream, an idea which sounds good without analyzing anything else.
As I said, POLITICAL SUICIDE. She has not stated it's a true plan in her government, and i really doubt that she will.

Can you imagine trying to defend that proposal in a debate?

As I said, utopic, interesting, but unrealistic, the rest of the public wouldn't agree, it almost promotes having more babies. It sounds like it.

Lets stick to the facts, not unrealistic ideas.

Al,

Are you saying Senator Clinton is just putting out the $5000 idea as a pipe dream to entice gullible people to vote for her?

"Are you saying Senator Clinton is just putting out the $5000 idea as a pipe dream to entice gullible people to vote for her?"

Why would she need to do that? She already has the gullible vote, regardless of her positions. They are her core. Look at her defenders in the comment sections of this blog. A bigger bunch of gullible, useful idiots I would be hard to find.

The trick is to make proposals that will expand your appeal outside your voter base, not double-down on appeals to your core voter.

Ok, so all the aborted baby's that have been neglected for all these year's should have a locktight case if mister Edward's should decide to represent them pro bono so they can retroactively collect their whopping 5,000?

Of course what a beter way to promote dozens of future demacratic voters in the future

A Ponzi scheme that would be a massive incentive for more illegal immigration.

An incentive to save? How about a substitute for savings? No need for those messy individual bank accounts (sometimes known as private property). Why not let all the funds be kept in the government treasury?

Not even a thinly disguised socialist agenda.

"The sad thing is, I really do believe your average American honestly believes this money just magically comes from the government, at no cost to them. Of course, this kind of thinking has yielded the current mentality on welfare and Social Security, so what is yet another nail in the coffin? "

For many of them, it does come at no cost to them. Welfare bums who won't get jobs when they can leech off the system aren't paying taxes. And those who choose to spend instead of save for retirement are enjoying a better life style than they can really afford at the expense of everyone else. As long as THEY aren't paying for it, they don't care who does.

People still complaining that these types of things cost too much?
Please. The government has plenty of money to provide for it's people.
If it didn't, there'd be outrage over the $9 Billion unaccounted for in Iraq.
Just print it up, and pass it along. Like we do for the war.

there'd be outrage over the $9 Billion unaccounted for in Iraq

No serious person beieves for a minute that the Surrender Party is concerned about " $9 Billion" being unaccounted for in Iraq. But nice try at changing the subject.

But Dave Williams #15 may be onto the real reason Hsu was around for so long.

HughS,
No serious person would listen to the Democrats or Republicans.
We'd just pay attention to their actions.

But, since it's not about the money, why do you think this country shouldn't care for it's citizens?

Robert
If your question is relevant to the post topic, the answer is that I am a democratic capitalist.

The government already redistributes enough of my income, in fact, too much of it. Where do you think Hillary will get the money to fund her scheme?

Hillary is just hiding behind the pretense of philanthropy to pick my pocket for her political gain. If she's serious about it, should propose a program specific tax increase.

Since it's all about caring, Robert, why don't you care enough to sharpen up your rhetoric? What an absurd question.
========================

Well robert is only concerned because he'd rather it be 9 billion unaccounted for in "social benefit" funds.

HughS,
Agreed. Hillary, as well as all others, should propose program specific tax increases for their pet projects. It shouldn't matter whether those are for social benefit programs or to fund a war of choice.

I had gotten the impression (perhaps wrongly) from your earlier post that the $9 Billion didn't matter to you.
Certainly to someone who thinks government already takes too much of his money, that unaccounted for $9 Billion would be a HUGE deal.

kim,
since when does "truth" = "rhetoric"?

Henry,
Wrong! I just thought the self-proclaimed "party of accountability" might speak the truth for once.
I promise not to let that happen again.

Look up what rhetoric means, fool.

This 'plenty' that the government has. You do know that it is removed from citizens by the implicit use of force, don't you. This, at bottom, is your 'caring'.
===========================

Hillary's comment was in front of a black audience, so it was racist, too.
=======