A Quote by Annie Lowrey

The Trump administration, for its part, has pushed for childcare to basically be written off on your taxes, which would subsidize the wealthiest families the most but would act as a significant subsidy to all families.
These were big ones. Those companies would then go in and build an electrical system or ports or highways, and these would basically serve just a few of the very wealthiest families in those countries.
While the wealthiest families completely benefit from the tax cuts targeted towards the upper brackets, middle-income families were hit with the unwelcome surprise of higher taxes on tax day.
Donald Trump would end up raising taxes on middle-class families.
Independent experts have looked at what I've proposed and looked at what Donald's [Trump] proposed, and basically they've said this, that if his tax plan, which would blow up the debt by over $5 trillion and would in some instances disadvantage middle-class families compared to the wealthy, were to go into effect, we would lose 3.5 million jobs and maybe have another recession.
Working families need daily access to affordable, quality early education and childcare, not just an annual tax break for wealthier families.
Congress has turned its back on America's working families. There are Teamster families in every congressional district in America, and those families vote. Those who would oppose these families have done so at their own political peril.
[Donald Trump] would give wealthy families 30 cents or 40 cents on the dollar for their nannies, and little or nothing for millions of hardworking families trying to afford child care.
Simply cutting the taxes for America's wealthiest families is clearly not creating the needed new jobs, and that strategy is unlikely to succeed in the future.
There are some people who get money just because they've got large families. So if it pays to make large families and earn more money than you would earn out at work, why not have more families, larger families? That's wrong.
Democrats have always historically referred to our families as working families, and I have sort of changed that moniker. I think what we have is a nation of worried families - families that are concerned about job security, families who thought their pensions were secure and now have questions.
Lower-income immigrant families might receive more in benefits than they pay in taxes. But that mathematical equilibrium is temporary, and an artifact of the way the tax-and-transfer system is structured to help lower-income families and to support families with kids.
The truth is that most families have no smart ones and no pretty ones. Most families are a bunch of unattractive dopes. And it turns out that the Bush family, like most families, has no smart ones. I was not surprised to see this.
Imagine in what the president [Donald trump] wants to do, the 400 wealthiest families in America will get a tax break of $7 million a year.
Very much in my books people find not surrogate families because they are real families. We've got families that we're related to by blood but we've also got families that we acquire. And those too I think are pretty much part of my books.
The enactment of the Homestead Act would create the strongest tie between the citizen and the Government-he would with cheerfulness contribute his proportionable part of the taxes to defray the expenses of the political system under which he lived.
The manner in which people's families and children are targeted does not suit Maharashtra's culture. The ones targeting families and children must remember that even they have families.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!