Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

NYU Prof Running for Congress Proposes Giving Families Monthly Cash for Each Child

NYU Prof Running for Congress Proposes Giving Families Monthly Cash for Each Child

“Universal Child Dividend”

The idea is that this would replace the Child Tax Credit, but it’s much pricier.

Campus Reform reports:

NYU prof’s congressional campaign promises free money to families

A New York University professor is running for Congress in the 12th District of New York with a platform plank of paying families $500 per child, per month.

An adjunct assistant business professor, Democrat Suraj Patel’s campaign introduces a policy called the Universal Child Dividend.

This policy would entail the federal government giving families $500 monthly per child, ages 0-5, and $350 monthly per child, ages 6-17. Patel’s campaign clarified on its website that this program would replace the Child Tax Credit.

However, the Child Tax Credit relieves families of up to $2,000 in taxes per child every year, making a large, financial difference between the two programs, with the Universal Child Dividend being objectively more expensive for the American taxpayers.

In email correspondence with Campus Reform, Vikas Patel, the policy director for Patel’s campaign, confirmed that it is not possible to say how much the Universal Child Dividend will cost yet.

“It’s really impossible to answer how much the child dividend would cost without dynamic scoring- something that the Congressional Budget Office would provide us with if Suraj won the election and introduced the bill,” Patel said.

He went on to explain that “the static cost of the child dividend would be $352,380,000 per year.” Patel also indicated that, in order to pay for this program, parts of the Trump tax-cuts would have to be rolled back.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I’m already paying, first for the poor with Medicaid, WIC, Section 8, and for the older via the public schools where they keep adding things like the school lunch program.

If they would eliminate this and require the parents to not divorce (except for the old A’s, Adultery, Abuse, Abandonment, then the at fault spouse could pay), it would be a good thing.

Instead it would just encourage more single motherhood.

Of course it would be more expensive because only taxpayers get the Child Tax Credit.

I agree with above that I’m already paying.

I pay for schools, food programs, health care, and housing while I have zero children.

I get no child credit, no child care credit, no child education credits on my taxes.

Eff you and your stupid plans.

But I thought the left was against having children because of climate crisis or something. Now, you want me to pay for everyone else’s children? These people are insane.

The Friendly Grizzly | February 27, 2020 at 1:55 pm

Is this a replacement for, or in addition to, WIC, SNAP, and other money stolen from the productive?

The province of Ontario, Canada has had this forever. It’s informally called the “baby bonus”.

It works exactly the way you think it will. I know personally, a number of young women who have gotten themselves knocked up by a one-night stand because between welfare, the baby bonus and subsidies they can get a higher standard of living than working.

Just one more program to get the parasites to vote for Dems. The hardest work they have to do is get off their dead butts and go vote.

When a country rewards the feckless at the expense of the productive it will fail.

It has never worked, ask about Rome and their “bread and circuses” and it never will. Only now we have IPhones, wide screen televisions and government checks.