this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
1741 points (98.8% liked)

People Twitter

6857 readers
718 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

How about some of that socialism for the rest of us, and not just for breeders and soybean farmers?

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 12 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Paying desperate people to produce corpo slaves is the furthest thing from socialism.

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

I was being a bit facetious, but yeah. It's a pretty transparent ploy to get the birth rate up for as little money as possible. God forbid line doesn't go up always and forever, for all eternity.

[–] honeynut@lemm.ee 0 points 7 hours ago

you clearly haven't met many tankies

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 12 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I feel like that's more than $5k in the picture if they're all $20 bills.

[–] kyle@lemm.ee 3 points 7 hours ago

Yeah, I counted at least 50 stacks of $20 bills. Usually those stacks are 100 bills each, so over $100k in that pic.

[–] Joeffect@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Those stacks aren't 100 dollars each that's for sure... More like 1000... I count at least 47 stacks... So let's round to 50...

Yeah that's 50k, which is definitely more than 5k

[–] AniZaeger@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago

$5,000 is a lot to those braindead morons who insist that "nobody wants to work" because they're still living comfortably off of a few $1,400 checks from half a decade ago...

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 4 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

Why would this in particular be important to him? I would think he wouldn't care

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 8 hours ago

Guess, in no particular order, could be all these or none of these:

Someone told him about runaway population decline now being taken seriously in SK and Japan, we're not quite in the unrecoverable zone yet. https://gigazine.net/gsc_news/en/20250404-south-korea-is-over

5000/child is enough to get a rural wageslave to bolster their numbers and create the next generation of right-wing voters, but not enough to get left-wing educated people who can make reasonable guesses 9 months into the future.

5000 per child is cheap and it's enough to gain him popularity where he's just starting to weaken.

[–] Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 hours ago

Evangelicals are a big part of his base and hate that there aren't more children in their sunday schools.

[–] mycelium_underground@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

Child bennefits are pretty common. "Nazi's breathed air" etc...

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 48 points 1 day ago

Trade:

  • One person's wages

For:

  • Mortgage payments on a reasonably sized house
  • All bills
  • Food for two adults plus children
  • Entertainment

Then you might see more babies.

It was their greed that caused this.

[–] jaschen@lemm.ee 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That roughly the total on what was saved with doge.

[–] littlebrother@lemm.ee 3 points 8 hours ago

I get your ribbing. But it's sad if people think they saved anything.

They literally mathematically added way more debt and cut gap.

Yeah we don't need govt workers..who contribute to tax base. Nah...

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

What are the odds this is just Clinton's $5,000 Baby Bond, which was just giving them a fund at birth that they can cash out when they turn 18?

Except this time there's no guardrails and he can give it to all his cryptobro friends.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

They sure do act like it's the 1930s alright...

[–] MithranArkanere@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Daycare is free where I live. It has to be. You can't expect people to pay for public services themselves; that's done with taxes. Corporations can't have customers or employees without people, and to get people to make more people, you have to make it easier for them. So what makes the most sense is cutting corporation porfits, which they don't need past a limit if they aren't investing in things that will benefit the public. So if a corporation isn't doing anything good, raise their taxes, use them to pay for daycare.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 8 hours ago

60 years ago, wages were sufficient that one partner could be a homemaker even if the other only had a modest job, and they could afford a house and a car. We've only needed daycare as wages have stagnated against the cost of living.

[–] cannon_annon88@lemmy.today 58 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This wouldn't even cover the hospital bill for most people lol.

And since hospitals know moms will be getting an extra 5k they will just add that into the cost somehow. /s

[–] twei@discuss.tchncs.de 41 points 1 day ago

No need to put a /s there

[–] Nerrad@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

So weird. These are the same imbiciles complaining about welfare babies.

[–] CheeryLBottom@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We need to feed the ones we have now

[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 17 hours ago

that sounds a lot like communism to me. Damn Commies!

[–] jaschen@lemm.ee 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I used to work as a teller at a bank. That bag of money is over 100k.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So conservatives want smaller government and less taxes but they're totally fine with their tax dollars being used to bribe women to give birth?

So they're stupid?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›