Extreme Commanders

Russia’s federal government offers maternity payments that went up at the start of the year. First-time mothers can now receive 677,000 rubles ($6,150) in 2025, up from 630,400 last year. And women who have a second child can get 894,000 rubles ($8,130), up from 833,000 rubles.

China wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 8:06 pm

'Baby bonuses': Trump admin devising ways to trigger 'traditional' family population boom

President Donald Trump's administration is on the hunt for ways to coax women into having more babies.

The United States' birth rate has been falling since 2007 and New York Times reporter Caroline Kitchener called it, “A warning of a future in which a smaller workforce cannot support an aging population and the social safety net," adding, “If the birthrate is not turned around, [different groups] fear, the country’s economy could collapse and, ultimately, human civilization could be at risk.”

One of the ideas under consideration is a "baby bonus," which would provide new parents with $5,000 after the baby is born.

Click on the link for the full article

Sound familiar? Trump is getting his ideas from Vlad:

Russian students can now get cash payments for having babies as Kremlin struggles with birth rate at ‘catastrophic’ low

Russia’s federal government offers maternity payments that went up at the start of the year. First-time mothers can now receive 677,000 rubles ($6,150) in 2025, up from 630,400 last year. And women who have a second child can get 894,000 rubles ($8,130), up from 833,000 rubles.

China wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 8:14 pm

GOP lawmakers running out of options to pay for Trump’s costly agenda

Republican leaders are rapidly running out of ways to pay for President Trump’s agenda as GOP lawmakers shoot down various proposals to cut spending or increase revenues.

Without finding some new ideas, the GOP risks adding trillions of dollars to future deficits by passing Trump’s agenda, something many conservatives are loath to do.

Outside observers are expressing pessimism the Republicans will land on ideas that have enough support to get passed into law.

“I just don’t see them getting the money. There’s no ‘there’ there, to be quite honest about it. If they want to spend money, they’re going to end up putting it on the debt,” said former Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), who previously served as the Republican chair of the Senate Budget Committee.

“They’re not going to get it out of tariffs, either. You have [White House trade adviser Peter] Navarro running around saying they’re going to get $600 billion in tariff revenue. That’s absurd. It’s basic economics. You raise the price on it, people stop buying it,” he said.

“It’s all a joke, to be honest with you, when it comes to money-saving and reducing debt,” he added. “This president doesn’t care too much about debt.”

Maya MacGuineas, the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said lawmakers need to steel themselves to political blowback and make significant cuts, even though it will reduce some benefits.

“If you take all the big pots of money off the table, it becomes very hard to find enough savings to offset $4 [trillion], $5 — or more — trillion in tax cuts, let alone bring the debt down, which is the stated goal of many members,” she said.

“People say you can’t touch benefits for anything, you can’t raise taxes. OK, then we’re going to have a debt crisis. That is the result of not talking about benefits and/or taxes,” she warned.

The most ambitious plan floated so far, to reduce Medicaid spending by hundreds of billions of dollars, now appears all but dead after a dozen House Republicans informed their leadership this week that they would not support a bill that includes any reduction in Medicaid coverage to vulnerable populations.

Republicans who have balked at Medicaid cuts say they’re willing to support new work requirements for the program, which would save an estimated $109 billion over 10 years, and to root out “fraud.” But that would achieve limited savings.

Budget experts say the proposed discretionary spending cuts recommended by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which would still need to be approved through a vote by Congress, will end up saving relatively little money over the long term compared to the huge projected cost of Trump’s agenda.

Click on the link for the full article

What a clown show.

China wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 8:06 pm

'Baby bonuses': Trump admin devising ways to trigger 'traditional' family population boom
“A warning of a future in which a smaller workforce cannot support an aging population and the social safety net," adding, “If the birthrate is not turned around, [different groups] fear, the country’s economy could collapse and, ultimately, human civilization could be at risk.”

The Sisko wrote: Tue Apr 22, 2025 7:56 am

China wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 8:06 pm

'Baby bonuses': Trump admin devising ways to trigger 'traditional' family population boom
“A warning of a future in which a smaller workforce cannot support an aging population and the social safety net," adding, “If the birthrate is not turned around, [different groups] fear, the country’s economy could collapse and, ultimately, human civilization could be at risk.”

How about you try not deporting brown people, anyone you disagree with, and supporting incels, mmmkaaay?