Quantcast

Comments about ‘Obama reiterates goal of universal preschool, but how will the nation pay for it?’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 28 2014 11:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
David
Centerville, UT

Why would any politician propose adding additional programs to an already bloated government? Why would anyone vote or propose for additional spending when we are already adding an average of $1 Trillion to the national debt every year? And that amount will sky-rocket in coming years due to unfunded entitlement liabilities.

Obama is not serious about leading our country and solving the big problems.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Isn't kindergarten preschool? Rather than adding more years, let's focus on improving the QUALITY of the educational years we already have.

NOMOLIESLANCE
Peoria, AZ

Funny how the HEADLINE is HOW WILL THE NATION PAY FOR IT, and then it goes on to prove it's a GREAT and SOUND policy, that pays huge dividends yearly and is paid for by already-in-place entities....

Is the headline a CON-JOB to get conservatives to read it? Liberals and progressives, and most conesravitves already KNOW the benefits of a GOOD and early education.

CPA Howard
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA

What the article fails to point out that by the 3rd grade any difference is gone. If we had a surplus and no debt and all the retirement programs were fully funded with real money and not treasury bonds that a our children will have to redeem, then I'd say let's try it.

When your in debt it doesn't make sense to add on more debt.

ute alumni
SLC, UT

barry wants the government to have more influence on kids and away from homes at an earlier age. this guy ceases to amaze me. i have a hard time thinking that this is in the top 100 things americans are interested in.

Norman Wright
Provo, UT

David - It pays for itself over time both in terms of tax dollars saved an in terms of higher quality of life for individuals. If you owned a business, would you not invest in machinery or training that would decrease your costs by more than the cost of investment. It seems to me that this is one investment that decreases government size and deficit over time. While that still leaves the big issue of entitlements on the table as it has been over the past several presidents of both parties, it is a positive step.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Don't we already have the "Head Start" program?

Hasn't that reduced poverty, and increased learning?

Has government become our children's daddy?

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The Head Start program has been proven to have no lasting benefit for the kids who participated.

So, why do we want to spend billions we don't have to do something that is ineffective? Maybe to provide free baby sitting to low information voters? Or, to more aggressively indoctrinate impressionable youth on the glories of Dear Leader and the need to vote Democrat? To ensure that all pre-school workers are unionized and thus loyal members of that reliable Democrat voting block?

Would this program terminate or replace even a single existing federal program, or just plop another load of bureaucracy on top of the massive number of existing failed federal programs?

No. Barry, this is NOT a good idea. It is just as bad as the rest of failed programs.

iron&clay
RIVERTON, UT

Obama seems like he just sits down with his Wall Street Banker buddies, who make a percentage by floating the bonds on all Federal debt, and brainstorms on how they can get more spending approved.

It's a big scam.

A monetary system that is based on credit will have consequences.

mcdugall
Murray, UT

One way to fund this program or reduce the yearly deficits is to adjust the income tax rates back to historical averages.

Cats
Somewhere in Time, UT

Hey, let's keep on adding new programs just because we think of them.

David
Centerville, UT

Norman--But how do you pay for it?

We are already borrowing huge amounts of money

to pay the interest on our national debt.

How do you pay for a new program? Tax the rich some more? But we haven't finished taxing the rich to pay for the debt we have already accrued. We haven't finished taxing the rich to pay down our debt. And we haven't finished taxing the rich to give to the poor.

I would love to take my family to Hawaii. It would do us good to have that time together. We would learn more about the world we live in. We would take lots of pictures to have fond memories. We would enjoy healthier air than what we are breathing in Utah.

But we don't have the money to go to Hawaii. So we don't go.

Our government doesn't have the money to pay for a new program. So we don't go there.

Its really that simple.

Let Obama propose where the money will come from for this new program, but before he does that, let him show us how he is reducing our current debt.

emilyrose
florida, 00

Well! i must say you are genius Mr. President everybody is focusing on just high school. Parents surely will be happy and proud to have a President like you. Thank You for a great plan.

Diana

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments