What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill

[Grand Mal]

You must be the one doing the math on the BBB for the GOP.

Yeah, I Googled 'compound interest calculator' and $1,000 at 7% annual compounded for 18 years comes out to just over $3,500.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Brought to you by small gubbermint Republicans.

 

[daeler]

Would it be required to prove paternity?

No clue, you would have to read the OP and go off what it says.

 

[cpwill]

For example, the average Pell Grant award is ~$5k per year. Replacing the Pell Grant system with a $5k initial investment at birth that grows tax free and could be used for college, trade school, or a house down-payment, would replace that expenditure with something better, and ultimately less costly.

 

[trixare4kids]

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." Babies born in the USA are Americans, but some are more American than others.
Sounds, uh, provocative.
But provocation seems to be becoming a theme in this administration.

He mentioned that the accounts would be only for children born to American citizens. What's provocative about it?

 

[BirdinHand]

A modest initial investment at a 7% annual return could grow to over $15,000 in 18 years through compounding, assuming no additional contributions. This could provide a meaningful nest egg for young adults.

Math isn’t your strong suit, is it

 

[cpwill]

For example, the average Pell Grant award is ~$5k per year. Replacing the Pell Grant system with a $5k initial investment at birth that grows tax free and could be used for college, trade school, or a house down-payment, would replace that expenditure with something better, and ultimately less costly.

Or, do this, and have a separate account for retirement.

Average SS check at age 65 is $1505 which = $18,060 a year. Assuming a - very - conservative 3% withdrawal rate, that's roughly equivalent to an annuity worth $602,000.

And, conveniently, $5 K from birth to age 67 at a 7.5% inflation-adjusted CAGR grows to about $635,824.

We can replace or massive Social Security expenditures with a much smaller one time payout and insure the benefit (ie: it doesn't drop below a given number) at minimal cost. AND the principle can be inheritable, building intergenerational wealth for all Americans.

 

[Grand Mal]

He mentioned that the accounts would be only for children born to American citizens. What's provocative about it?

Nope. Parents having social security numbers. They don't have to be citizens.
It's provocative because it selects some citizens and disqualifies others. Every baby born in the USA is an American citizen.
But you know this.

 

[trixare4kids]

Nope. Parents having social security numbers. They don't have to be citizens.
It's provocative because it selects some citizens and disqualifies others. Every baby born in the USA is an American citizen.
But you know this.

I reviewed the bill. Parents just have to be the legal guardians of American born babies.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It's beneficial in the context of setting aside money, but I do agree with a program like this being more flexible in how qualified participants can access the money. Since this money would help lower income people, then accessing in times of need is better than penalties around removing it before the prescribed dates. The taxable aspect of this also needs to be resolved.

 

[cpwill]

He mentioned that the accounts would be only for children born to American citizens. What's provocative about it?

As I read it, it's "both parents have social security numbers", which is not the same thing. And even then, "born to US citizens" will instantly create legal troubles, as - whether the administration likes it or not - birthright citizenship is the law of the land.

 

[Metric Mouse]

I don't see a downside to this.

 

[Bodecea]

Hopefully this is not a duplicate thread but after a brief search I see this has not been discussed.

A 1K account for all newborns. An investment in our children for the future.

What do you think?

=================================

What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill​

What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill

House Republican's budget bill would create $1,000 "Trump accounts" for babies born between January 2025 and January 2029.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[VySky]

For all babies born on American soil? Cool!

Yes. With exceptions of course

 

[VySky]

Unnecessary and dumb.

Why?

 

[VySky]

Hmm, massive cuts to SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, education, and biomedical research while adding trillions to the debt vs. a measly $1,000.

On net, massive disinvestment in our children.

For all newborns.

 

[VySky]

Complicated, It is one way for conservatives to actually be pro-life. But it really depends on how or when the money could be used.

Also is this going to babies born to rich people? Why? I would say increase the amount and set a maximum earning for the parent/s.

It’s all inclusive. No divisions.

 

[dockside]

For all babies born on American soil? Cool!

Not all babies as at least one parent needs to be a US citizen.

Also, for those unable to contribute to the account during those 18 years, at an annual 7% interest/gain, the total would be $3570 after 18 years, according to an AP article I read in today's newspaper. And, according to trump, that $3570 will give them a "jump on life". In 18 years, at the rate of inflation the past 18 years, that amount will be, at the most, 1/2 the value of $3570 today. Big deal.

And, it goes to every baby, rich or poor, who has at least one US citizen parent. Big deal! /s

 

[dockside]

For all newborns.

Where are you getting 7% return? Your math is way off, but it also doesn't address real growth. $15,000 will lose more than 36% value at 2% annual inflation. And if the account is returning 7%, the inflation rate is not 2%.

I got it from the AP article I read. But, you are correct. $1,000 18 years from today will be next to worthless, no matter what the return and/or rate of inflation. But, where did your$15,000 come from?

 

[VySky]

I got it from the AP article I read. But, you are correct. $1,000 18 years from today will be next to worthless, no matter what the return and/or rate of inflation. But, where did your$15,000 come from?

Keep in mind parents can make yearly contributions I believe up to $5000.

 

[Michael Cole]

I got it from the AP article I read. But, you are correct. $1,000 18 years from today will be next to worthless, no matter what the return and/or rate of inflation. But, where did your$15,000 come from?

that was bucky's math. a little off.

 

[Questerr]

A great plan for children's future and also like this part where parents or third party members could also invest each year:


"The government would contribute $1,000 to every eligible child's account, which would be invested in the stock market on their behalf. Families and third parties could also contribute up to $5,000 a year to a child's account. "


This is a great way to help them beginning their adult life with a down payment on a home or business venture or payoff school loans.

Are all fees for stock trading going to be waived for these accounts?

 

[Showtime586]

Hopefully this is not a duplicate thread but after a brief search I see this has not been discussed.

A 1K account for all newborns. An investment in our children for the future.

What do you think?

=================================

What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill​

What to know about $1,000 "Trump accounts" for newborns included in House bill

House Republican's budget bill would create $1,000 "Trump accounts" for babies born between January 2025 and January 2029.

www.cbsnews.com

I think that a Maga idiot is the only person that would fall for such a "bait and switch" tactic.

 

[Showtime586]

A lot of parents are bad with their finances, so this amazing Trump account gives young children at birth the ability to participate in the market.

"Amazing"......lmao

 

[joluoto]

That money will only go to rich people.