https://www.washingtonpost.com...fit-democrats-biden/

“Under the proposal, the Internal Revenue Service would provide $3,600 over the course of the year per child under the age of 6, as well as $3,000 per child of ages 6 to 17. The size of the benefit would diminish for Americans earning more than $75,000 per year, as well as for couples jointly earning more than $150,000 per year. The payments would be sent monthly beginning in July, a delay intended to give the IRS time to prepare for the massive new initiative.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com...ld-benefit-stimulus/

Mitt Romney proposes even larger amounts.

“Romney’s proposal would provide $4,200 per year for every child up to the age of 6, as well as $3,000 per year for every child age 6 to 17.”

Here are the non-paywall versions:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...ns-steam/ar-BB1dtdSs

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...s-effort/ar-BB1dop2m

Shouldn't we couple this initiative with much better funding for family planning so that a greater fraction of those children are wanted?

I am quite supportive of funding/improving sex ed., funding family planning services, increasing access to and lowering the cost for artificial contraceptives, etc. But not sure how that fits in a pandemic economic relief bill.

Romney’s two-page brochure for his proposed “Family Security Act”:
https://www.romney.senate.gov/...0act_one%20pager.pdf

Ross Douthat argues for Romney’s plan:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/0...ney-family-plan.html

I'm not getting why this is appropriate. Lots of different demographics have needs, not just families with young children. Plus a couple making over 100k a year does not need this. What am I missing?

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:
I'm not getting why this is appropriate. Lots of different demographics have needs, not just families with young children. Plus a couple making over 100k a year does not need this. What am I missing?

Almost every one has needs. These proposals prioritize “young children” over adults.

As part of the COVID-19 relief plan, most adults will still get their $1400 per head anyway.

Beyond that, cash for every one (including adults) can go with another bill/program, e.g., “universal basic income” championed by Andrew Young. That can be debated after the pandemic is under control.

Also, isn't part of the prioritization of families with children based on the idea that those with children, esp. young children, are having a much harder time during pandemic restrictions? For example, because of the difficulty of trying to do child care at home *and* work from home?

I thought the child support program was meant to be permanent, not a temporary COVID stopgap. If so, it can't be bundled into reconciliation.

I think we DO need more generous tax support for families with children as an anti-poverty measure. The fraction of children living in poverty is astonishing and this is an administratively easy way to pull millions of children above the poverty line.

quote:

I thought the child support program was meant to be permanent, not a temporary COVID stopgap.

If so, all the better!

quote:

Originally posted by ShiroKuro:
Also, isn't part of the prioritization of families with children based on the idea that those with children, esp. young children, are having a much harder time during pandemic restrictions? For example, because of the difficulty of trying to do child care at home *and* work from home?

More mouths to feed is my take.

Off to Google to read the latest stimulus news.

BTW, take a look at what Europe has done with these kinds of programs. You'll be surprised (or not).

More details ...

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/0...in-covid-relief.html

The estimated cost to giving $3000 per child is $120 Billion per year (much lower than what I previously estimated), and if that is made “permanent,” is expected to lift 4.1 million children out of poverty.

quote:

Originally posted by Axtremus:
The estimated cost to giving $3000 per child is $120 Billion per year (much lower than what I previously estimated),..

Me too. It's because it includes the already existing 2k child tax credit.

This adds 1k, and makes it refundable and 'advanceable'.