COVID Economy

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I think we agree, mostly. That's why I emphasized that any benefits should be for those who have been directly impacted by the virus/shutdowns.

Not all of those impacted have been made unemployed.

Agreed.  I just don't think anyone should think of stimulus payments as relief.  That's not what they are supposed to be and frankly I think they are not terribly helpful. 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

And it didn't really work because most people stuck it into their savings accounts.

What is your source for this.  Everything I’ve seen says that low income people are spending at or above prior spending levels (ie people who got the money). 

It’s the high income people where spending is down and saving is up (those who did not receive the money).

Granted if there is a study in aggregate that you have seen would love to read it to see if my logic is off. 

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I hope you people realize that the $600 was pushed by one side who refused to talk more if that was increased.

Is eligibility for the stimulus still based on 2019 income? Because I imagine for a lot of people, things have drastically changed since the end of 2019.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

What is your source for this.  Everything I’ve seen says that low income people are spending at or above prior spending levels (ie people who got the money). 

It’s the high income people where spending is down and saving is up (those who did not receive the money).

Granted if there is a study in aggregate that you have seen would love to read it to see if my logic is off. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2020/10/19/how-americans-spent-1200-stimulus-checks/?sh=7cf61be3680f

70% either stuck it in a savings account or paid down debt.  Neither are activities that stimulate the economy.

But you are correct that those who spent it were largely more poor.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-did-people-do-with-their-1-200-stimulus-checks-finally-an-answer-11597681021

Again, the whole point of these were to *stimulate* the economy.  Which doesn't really work if 70% of the people don't spend it.  And in fact the data above shows that giving people money who don't need it isn't the solution here.  The solution is giving people more through enhanced unemployment, etc.

My point is, give our resources to those who need it.  Not to almost everyone in hopes that they'll spend it and generate economic activity.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Debt repayment is spending the money in my book. It cycles more money through the economy.  Only 36% saved it per that report.  So that would be interesting to see the income levels of that group.   

[shoothoops]

This is the bare minimum deal for Republicans to pass to sell to Georgia voters. Conveniently timed just before the Holidays and and January 5th election.

[jesmu84]

Agreed.  I just don't think anyone should think of stimulus payments as relief. That's not what they are supposed to be and frankly I think they are not terribly helpful.

That's fair.

So what would be vehicles for relief? I think there needs to be more than just unemployment benefits. 15 million lost their insurance. Several million on the verge of eviction.

This is a financial/economic disaster and our leaders are treating it like a small scratch

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Debt repayment is spending the money in my book. It cycles more money through the economy.  Only 36% saved it per that report.  So that would be interesting to see the income levels of that group.   

No debt payments isn't spending the money.  You stimulate the economy when you buy something regardless of how you pay for it.  A debt payment just goes back to the finance company, and yes that can be lent out again, but that's no different than what a bank does with your savings account assets.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

That's fair.

So what would be vehicles for relief? I think there needs to be more than just unemployment benefits. 15 million lost their insurance. Several million on the verge of eviction.

This is a financial/economic disaster and our leaders are treating it like a small scratch

I'm just saying we should be spending money on programs that are going to help those most directly impacted because it will help people who need it AND stimulate the economy. 

[Hards Alumni]

I hope you people realize that the $600 was pushed by one side who refused to talk more if that was increased.

And half the Democrats too.  Republicans don't care about you, Democrats only pretend to.

[GB Warrior]

The fact that $600 checks came at the expense of state and local aid is criminal. These checks won't  stimulate the economy - they'll go to debt payments and essential items for most Americans, or into a rainy day fund.

Meanwhile, bankrupting S&L governments is the GOP long game.

[jesmu84]

Stuff like this is exactly why the money should be going directly to individuals:

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2020/12/pa-misses-deadline-to-spend-108m-in-rent-mortgage-relief-from-cares-act.html

When you add layers of complexity and give some people control over others' access to the funds, it's going to lead to problems.

[Jockey]

And half the Democrats too.  Republicans don't care about you, Democrats only pretend to.

The 1st sentence is flat out incorrect.

The 2nd is true.

The 3rd is semi-true.

[Hards Alumni]

The 1st sentence is flat out incorrect.

The 2nd is true.

The 3rd is semi-true.

Actually, its 100% accurate, and when I said half, I meant most.  I can't believe the Democrats chose Nancy for another round of SOTH.  She has been totally ineffective.

$600 is 'significant'?  Fire that woman into the sun.

[Jockey]

Actually, its 100% accurate, and when I said half, I meant most.  I can't believe the Democrats chose Nancy for another round of SOTH.  She has been totally ineffective.

$600 is 'significant'?  Fire that woman into the sun.

In case you don’t pay attention, Pelosi and the Dems in the House PASSED a bill with a $1200 dollar payout. McConnell refused to vote on it.

Voting for something virtually unanimously actually means that it wasn’t just by half the Dems. Not too hard to understand.

[MU82]

What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?

I am talking about Scoopers who qualify for it but don't really need it, which applies to a pretty large number (perhaps even the majority) of American citizens.

We will take our $1,200 and do the same thing we did with the $2,400 earlier this year: Give half to our favorite charities, and put the other half in the college investment accounts we have set up for our grandkids.

I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.

But hey, I am happy to help charities and my grandkids, so that's cool too.

[Galway Eagle]

What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?

I am talking about Scoopers who qualify for it but don't really need it, which applies to a pretty large number (perhaps even the majority) of American citizens.

We will take our $1,200 and do the same thing we did with the $2,400 earlier this year: Give half to our favorite charities, and put the other half in the college investment accounts we have set up for our grandkids.

I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.

But hey, I am happy to help charities and my grandkids, so that's cool too.

Buying a new water heater without feeling the stress of something like that going out when I've already run up my credit card on Christmas gifts.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I have to believe there was a better way to make this stimulus money work as intended: to help those in need while boosting the economy. Making it progressive -- those more in need get more than $600, those less in need get less (or none) -- seems like a logical solution.

It definitely should be more progressive.  As was pointed out above, those with lower incomes spent their stimulus checks last time, while those with more income mostly saved it or paid down debt.  So giving more to those with less, would theoretically stimulate the economy more.  Furthermore, it would theoretically lessen the demand on other social programs as well as on unemployment.

But that is antithetical with the trickle-down mindset.

[Hards Alumni]

In case you don’t pay attention, Pelosi and the Dems in the House PASSED a bill with a $1200 dollar payout. McConnell refused to vote on it.

Voting for something virtually unanimously actually means that it wasn’t just by half the Dems. Not too hard to understand.

Lol they pass dog crap all the time that won't pass, and they KNOW it won't pass.  But they do it all the time for optics.  It is red meat for folks like you, and you eat it up.

Just like the Republicans attempted to repeal Obamacare how many times?  It is political theater for dopes.  Remember when Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, or Mitt Romney 'reached across the aisle' to vote with the Democrats?  How many of those votes were the deciding vote?  It is the APPEARANCE of bipartisanship.  There was enough votes without them, so they were allowed to vote to appear centrist. 

The ONLY reason that this most recent 'stimulus' passed was because the GOP was worried about the races in GA.  The messaging was starting to hurt, so he took away the message.  You know they don't care because Nancy says 600 bucks is 'significant'.  Really?  $600?  It's one of two things here, Jockey, either she believes that $600 was 'significant' and she is massively out of touch OR she is a terrible negotiator.  I'm not sure which is worse.

[jesmu84]

https://www-bloomberg-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-12-21/beer-restaurants-and-nascar-win-tax-breaks-in-virus-relief-bill?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#skip-to-main-content

Wtf are we doing?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

When your bill is 5,000+ pages long, it will have a ton of sh*t. 

[MUBurrow]

nm

[Jockey]

Lol they pass dog crap all the time that won't pass, and they KNOW it won't pass.  But they do it all the time for optics.  It is red meat for folks like you, and you eat it up.

Just like the Republicans attempted to repeal Obamacare how many times?  It is political theater for dopes.  Remember when Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, or Mitt Romney 'reached across the aisle' to vote with the Democrats?  How many of those votes were the deciding vote?  It is the APPEARANCE of bipartisanship.  There was enough votes without them, so they were allowed to vote to appear centrist. 

The ONLY reason that this most recent 'stimulus' passed was because the GOP was worried about the races in GA.  The messaging was starting to hurt, so he took away the message.  You know they don't care because Nancy says 600 bucks is 'significant'.  Really?  $600?  It's one of two things here, Jockey, either she believes that $600 was 'significant' and she is massively out of touch OR she is a terrible negotiator.  I'm not sure which is worse.

You didn't respond to my point.

It has nothing to do with being a good negotiator. McConnell was not going to allow a vote on any bill with a $1200 payment. Period.

Can Nancy get anything done? Ask the 23,000,000 people on Obamacare.

[GooooMarquette]

And at over 5,000 pages long, it is virtually certain that no elected official knows every detail tucked into the bill. Cut, paste, revise until it is unreadable and largely unread, except by teams of staffers....

[Jockey]

What are folks here who will be getting the $600 (or $1,200 if a couple, or more if there are kids) planning to do with the dough?

Same as last time. Local food banks.

We don't need the money and shouldn't even get the money. But at least it will go to good use. Win/win. Food banks will get the money into the economy and people that are suffering will get help.