Sorry, I meant to say this socialistic proposal is by Republicans, not AOC.
Republican-Sponsored Socialism
In a move that AOC, Elizabeth Warren, and all the Progressives will soon seek to expand, the New York Times reveals Trump Officials Draft Plan to Pay At-Home Parents, Using Funds for Working Ones
The Trump administration is moving to allow married couples with a stay-at-home spouse to collect child care subsidies, a policy championed by Vice President JD Vance, using funds from a federal program intended to assist working parents, according to people familiar with the discussions.
The change would create the only federal subsidy to pay parents to stay home and raise their children, one of the most significant efforts to date by the Trump administration to harness federal funds to promote a traditional view of families.
Under the draft new rule, parents who stay home with their children could benefit from the program, which typically provides about $9,000 per child each year, potentially reshaping which families get federal child care money.
The move could end up redirecting money away from working parents and their child care providers, causing some to raise their rates or even close, critics said, potentially worsening what many experts say is a child care crisis in the country.
About 80 percent of the 870,000 families who currently get the child care subsidies have single working parents, most of them mothers, according to Health Department data.
The policy change would effectively create a government incentive for parents to stay home with their children, an idea embraced as part of a broader conservative effort to advance policies that promote more mothers staying at home.
The new rule being drafted would allow married couples with one stay-at-home parent in certain income brackets to collect a subsidy, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the plan before it is finalized. The change could be made without approval from Congress.
The plan is being pushed by the White House and is seen as a top priority of Mr. Vance, according to several people familiar with the discussions. The draft rule also incorporates policies in legislation written by Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he was a senator from Florida.
Some family policy experts said the changes to the program would hurt parents who have to work and have difficulty affording child care.
“I am a big proponent of more support for stay-at-home parents. But this is not how I would choose to do it,” said Patrick T. Brown, a fellow at the Life and Family Initiative at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank.
“Expanding the eligibility without increasing funding would mean more parents competing for the same dollars, and leaving more parents — particularly single working parents — worse off,” he said.
Question of the Day
If Democrats proposed this idea would you be saying “I agree with the premise of this plan”?
Where Is this Headed?
To be fair Democrats would not propose this exact plan. But also to be fair, you are clueless if you don’t know where this is headed.
- The current tease is that no new money will go into this.
- Republicans and Democrats will soon find that $9,000 isn’t enough.
- So, they will both agree to expand the program.
- But Democrats will want to restore the benefits that were cut to fund this new idea.
- And they will.
- The bottom line is Republicans are proposing a new benefit that AOC, Elizabeth Warren and all the Progressives will love, even if they distance themselves from the initial implementation.
A Word About New Programs
MOM accurately note “Every new program requires money.” Yet, she agrees with the premise of the plan.
I don’t, precisely because every new program requires money.
MOM does have this right “I foresee this growing into a huge government-run handout. Just my opinion.”
More Government Expansion
Here’s the key: “Expanding the eligibility without increasing funding would mean more parents competing for the same dollars, and leaving more parents — particularly single working parents — worse off.”
That funding will be restored, and the new program expanded.
I cannot begin to estimate what this foot-in-the-door proposal will eventually cost.
But I can tell you that Democrats are salivating over the new social benefit no matter how much they pretend otherwise.
The MAGA Agenda
- Start a war after campaigning against war
- Protect pedophiles including Trump, despite signing a bill mandating unredacted names
- Expand social programs
- Tell farmers the price of diesel is a tiny price to pay after promising to cut energy bills in half
- Make friends with North Korea and Russia
- Make enemies with Canada and other allies
- Sell pardons for a going price of $1 million or more
- Seek payments for those who invaded the Capitol
- Threaten to take Greenland, a NATO country, by force, to steal its minerals
- Jack up tariffs, a tax on US consumers and businesses
- Let Hegseth, someone totally incompetent, run the US military
- Do nothing to reduce the national debt
- Show more concern for the ballroom, arch, and reflecting pool than dead US soldiers from an idiotic war
- Blame everything on Biden and Obama
That’s one hell of a platform. But the cult cheers. Morons are still touting “Trump was right about everything.”
Gallup Party Affiliation Favors Democrats by Largest Margin Since 2015
Let’s review what this means historically.
Expect a Republican bloodbath in November because one is coming.
Related Posts
August 31, 2026: Classified Document Leak Shows US Is Militarily Overextended in Iran
The truth is out. Hegseth has seriously messed up the war in Iran.
September 4, 2026: Trump Threatens to Cancel Trade with World Unless the Fed Cuts Rates
Let’s discuss the economic madness of Trump’s threat although it’s a ridiculous, idiotic bluff.
September 5, 2026: Major Escalation, Iran Fired at US Aircraft Carrier, US Hits 3 Iranian Tankers
Iran’s attack on Navy warships amounts to major escalation.
Grok Addendum
Redirecting existing childcare subsidies from working parents (mostly single moms) to pay married stay-at-home spouses creates a new federal entitlement without new funding.
It favors one family model via taxpayer money, risks reducing care slots and raising costs for those who must work, and invites future expansion by both parties.
Better to cut taxes and regulations so more families can afford their own choices.
Correction: Trump is not making friends with Russia, despite an occasional rhetorical feint in that direction. The CIA and its partner, MI6, are providing satellite intel and targeting data to help Ukraine fire missiles at Russian civilians in Russia proper, on the beach in Crimea and in dormitories in Donbas. Trump himself was almost certainly personally involved in keeping Putin on the phone in December 2024 when CIA-targeted “Ukrainian” drones were headed for Putin’s Valdai residence. The US is a participant in the ongoing war against Russia. The Ukraine is just America’s battering ram. Continuing Biden’s war unabated is another betrayal of Trump’s campaign promises.
I propose NO MONEY for everyone!
In the coming AI future, no one is going to be required to work to pay bills, to have a roof over their head, to eat healthfully, to get whatever medical care they need. All this will be provided for free.
People will be able to make music, make art, make furniture if they want, write poetry, write novels, offer exercise classes, etc., etc. BUT no one is going to get paid for anything they do because money will be obsolete and again, everything will be free.
The AI and its robot workers will be do all necessary work, provide everything humans need, govern the world, maintain order and elevate humans so we can be all we can be!
In this relatively near future, country borders, human governments, politicians, police, ICE, spies, ownership, money, etc. will no longer exist. People will be able to travel where and when they please and live wherever they please.
Life will be a bowl of cherries for everyone!
Consistent with the reality that government is a criminal organization which mainly takes money from the people who earn it and transfers it to the politically well-connected or uses it to buy votes.
-Israel lobbyists
-Billionaire lobbyists
-MICC lobbyists
-Foreign government lobbyists
Are bribing government officials.
And Bipartisan government officials bribe the voters competitively.
So called Democracy is a bribing system.
I’m all for paying stay at home moms if the funding comes out of the military budget.
It’s a better, more productive use of cash than blowing holes in the ground.
I actually do because I think it’s a concerning problem that you simply can’t have a stay at home spouse anymore like your grandparents or parents did. People whine that no one is having kids, but affording even a single child is a nightmare these days. Let alone the two needed just to keep the population steady. Don’t want a demographic collapse like Korea? Fix this right now.
If you’re well off and white having a kid means almost certainly sacrificing your finances and moving down a rung. Turns out most middle class people don’t want to be lower class, so they’re not having kids. There’s your white extinction right wing kooks. It’s not brown people, it’s not China, it’s a parasitic capitalism that discourages the very fundamental human experience.
As to where we get the money, that’s easy! Our bloated, overstuffed, gluttonous golden calf of a military that is currently getting its ass whipped. Here’s an idea: funding to make our country run instead of funding to drop on a little girl’s school. Funding for us to have families instead of funding to murder families. Funding to build instead of destroy and waste. I’m tired of my taxes mostly going to ontologically evil garbage no one voted for. It’s all our money, why isn’t it going back to us?
Addendum: socialism is apparently what you call it when a government functions for its basic purpose of supporting its constituents as opposed to conquest and kleptocracy.
And as for working parents. Yeah go ahead and expand what was cut too. I want that military budget slashed 75-80% so I’m sure we can find the money. We are supposedly the richest nation on earth but can’t seem to have standards like Europe because we have to pack an aircraft carrier full of gold every year. No more I say!
You have identified the root problem: “you simply can’t have a stay at home spouse anymore like your grandparents or parents did… most middle class people don’t want to be lower class, so they’re not having kids.” But this is a solution that doesn’t fix the root problem(s), it just tries to put a bandaid on it via another huge government handout.
I will hold out for “Democrats Propose Free Money for Stay at Home” retirees that vote Democratic.
I like that!
If the Republicans are so concerned about child welfare perhaps a focus on getting them properly fed and educated would be more appropriate
We have nowhere to turn. Everybody wants to write checks to everybody (charged to the credit card of everybody). Free candy for everybody!
What’s surprising to me is that only 870K families currently get these benefits.
In a country with roughly 33 million families with kids under 18, 870K is only 2% of all families. That seems very low.
Will the recipients be required to pass a test of loyalty to “traditional family values?” Imagine the GOP deciding to pay gays stay at home parents for doing what they are already doing? I guess the GOP is as bad of a mess as their rivals.
This reminds me of “W” Bush wanting to replace the welfare state with government checks to churches. This was of course a sop to evangelicals. But umm, gee, might that mean mosques? Poof, away went that wish item.
But there is a consolation prize: the Supreme Court says government has to subsidize sectarian private schools.
None of these decision makers had earned a genuine fair dollar in heir lives. But they are happy to write checks on us!
Yeah, they’ll have to define “married” – it’ll end up languishing in court.
I support the supposed intent but oppose the method. The cost of living, particularly taxes and inflation need to be fixed. A good start would be a 70% cut to the Pentagon. The strong bias against men in the legal system needs to be corrected. Finally, control immigration.
Anything the democrats propose will become a target for the irresponsible reproducers and scammers, will face continuous pressure for sustained increases and will be another entitlement that will be impossible to get rid of.
You forgot a few important planks to the grift:
I guess it makes sense if you are trying to shrink the workforce. Lose both the female parent and a childcare worker…
Staying at home making babies all day, and getting a government check for that. Hmm, didn’t we hear of that before? Wasn’t that what LBJ enabled, it was said, and Ronald Reagan mocked and rose up against?
The People’s Republic of China did a big thing to manipulate the birthrate. And that worked out so well, right?
People need to be sterilized after 3 kids.
Robots and AI will shrink job opportunities.
Back to the 1950’s.
Does this include mothers who work remote? A lot of them do.
The prototypical German and Japanese welfare states from around 1900 were social engineering programs to produce lots of healthy male soldiers and factory and farm workers, with women as moms and homemakers doing their part. They had medals for productive moms. The ultimate aim was classical wars of territorial; conquest for imperial gain. Just what we need now, right, more millions of human factory workers and soldiers? Like we need buggy whips.
‘The Wanting Seed‘ by Anthony Burgess (‘A Clockwork Orange‘ author) portrayed a future staged WWI style trench war into which all the excess humans were dumped, again to adjust the numbers bureaucratically.
This time, is once again a sop to nostalgic Southern fantasies: an indispensable voting bloc, and the greatest source of trouble in the western world for generations.
I’m learning new expressions since moving to the South. I think I’m using this in the right context: “Bless their hearts!”
You’re correct, it’s a fun expression when dealing with dunces and fools. Although I would have said, Bless their little hearts.
I was favorable towards the revenue neutral Romney Family Pan more than a decade ago. Mish is no doubt right aboiut how this plays out with a Dem House.
So if you are wealthy enough to be a stay-at-home mom, with the assumption that you are married and have a sugar daddy, you get money for that.
Everyone else, single parents and working parents alike, the ones who have to work, end up paying for this.
Just another grift for the wealthy.
They aren’t even offering to feed us cake. Marie Antoinette did better
I thing you’ll find that Marie Antoinette did not “offer” cake; she assumed the poor already had cake like she did. However, you are correct that those who can’t afford to take time off will subsidize those who can. This is just government business as usual and the voters are too stupid to figure it out.
The “cake” in this quote was really just good quality bread.
The number of rich people in that category is really quite small.
You are cheating your children if you choose to work at the expense of their upbringing. If the only way you can afford to have children is for both parents to work, then you should not have children.
One of the big reasons that the US is in the pickle it is in today is because both parents work.