[GT] US election - It's 2020, what could possibly go wrong?

[KootenayFlamesFan]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1344315400746631176

[GreenLantern2814]

He’s going to pardon Dylann Roof before this is done.

[direwolf]

Trump and his minions just trying to burn the whole thing to the ground on their way out the door. Sure, we only have 3 more weeks of this. But a lot more damage can still be done over that time.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

It's amazing how long it takes to do good long term things, compared to how easily you can destroy.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

It's amazing how long it takes to do good long term things, compared to how easily you can destroy.

Not really. It takes months to build a house but only a few hours to burn it to the ground.

[darockwilder]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

He’s going to pardon Dylann Roof before this is done.

I was thinking the same thing after he pardoned the Blackwater employees.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

The Washington Post editorial board has an article today about why these $2000 are such a bad idea, and I agree fully. So many of these checks will go to people who don't need it, and not nearly enough is being done to help the people affected most.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...48c_story.html

Means-tested stimulus cheques, as proposed by this article, are notoriously bad ideas.

Much of this is going to be saved, not spent, since restaurants are closed and air travel limited. The resources would be far better spent, in terms of both economic equity and economic growth, on longer extension of unemployment benefits, aid to state and local governments, and vaccines.

This is just pure speculation, and likely false. There are legitimate concerns that it will end up just being wealth transfer to Amazon, etc., because people won't spend it locally, and that's a legitimate concern with all forms of UBI until countries improve their tax codes. However, people are struggling and the government has given bailouts to Wall Street, defense contractors, etc. during this pandemic. It's a bad look when you tell people to stay home and not work during the pandemic but give them very minimal means to support themselves at the same time.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Means-tested stimulus cheques, as proposed by this article, are notoriously bad ideas.



This is just pure speculation, and likely false. There are legitimate concerns that it will end up just being wealth transfer to Amazon, etc., because people won't spend it locally, and that's a legitimate concern with all forms of UBI until countries improve their tax codes. However, people are struggling and the government has given bailouts to Wall Street, defense contractors, etc. during this pandemic. It's a bad look when you tell people to stay home and not work during the pandemic but give them very minimal means to support themselves at the same time.

It should at least be a lower income cut off. It makes no sense to be giving these checks to salaried white collar workers working from home. Taking the money from unemployment boosts/extensions and giving it to people not affected seems like the worst possible idea. A one time payment of $2000 does not help the people who are really hurt one bit, and 75% of those checks will go to people not financially affected.

This isn't means tested stimulus, this is figuring out how to help the right people. Lower income people have been more likely to lose work from this, so at least a lower cutoff would target the help a bit better. But unemployment streamlining/boosting/extending is probably the best answer. As is helping businesses like restaurants survive.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It should at least be a lower income cut off. It makes no sense to be giving these checks to salaried white collar workers working from home. Taking the money from unemployment boosts/extensions and giving it to people not affected seems like the worst possible idea. A one time payment of $2000 does not help the people who are really hurt one bit, and 75% of those checks will go to people not financially affected.

Agreed.

If my wife and I receive a disbursement, I'm going to push for us to donate the entire amount to food banks and any other charitable group that will help the unemployed at the moment.

It's a tough situation, and I don't know that blindly throwing money at the problem is the best answer. Some of that money will go directly to families in need. Some of it will simply be used to pay for credit that has already been spent. Much of it will sit in people's bank accounts without fully circulating in the economy. I'm not sure how to fix that last part.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Agreed.

If my wife and I receive a disbursement, I'm going to push for us to donate the entire amount to food banks and any other charitable group that will help the unemployed at the moment.

It's a tough situation, and I don't know that blindly throwing money at the problem is the best answer. Some of that money will go directly to families in need. Some of it will simply be used to pay for credit that has already been spent. Much of it will sit in people's bank accounts without fully circulating in the economy. I'm not sure how to fix that last part.

Back during the first round of these payments, a direct stimulus was needed. The overall economy was crashing. The overall economy has recovered pretty well now. Some sectors are in shambles, and people who work in those industries are hurting the most. The money needs to be more targeted to help those people and industries in need this time around.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

The Washington Post editorial board has an article today about why these $2000 are such a bad idea, and I agree fully. So many of these checks will go to people who don't need it, and not nearly enough is being done to help the people affected most.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...48c_story.html

No different from tax cuts, how come we never means test the wealthy when we give them an extra million a year?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It should at least be a lower income cut off. It makes no sense to be giving these checks to salaried white collar workers working from home. Taking the money from unemployment boosts/extensions and giving it to people not affected seems like the worst possible idea. A one time payment of $2000 does not help the people who are really hurt one bit, and 75% of those checks will go to people not financially affected.

I agree that a one-time payment does very little to help those who need it most, but it's basically all the Republicans are going to give. It's at least something, and it's far and away more meaningful than $600 is.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

It's a tough situation, and I don't know that blindly throwing money at the problem is the best answer. Some of that money will go directly to families in need. Some of it will simply be used to pay for credit that has already been spent. Much of it will sit in people's bank accounts without fully circulating in the economy. I'm not sure how to fix that last part.

If it helps rebuild savings or lessens interest payments that were pooched by the pandemic, why is that a bad thing?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by rubecube

If it helps rebuild savings or lessens interest payments that were pooched by the pandemic, why is that a bad thing?

It’s not at all. The idea of policing how people spend their own money or that everything is on merit when we know most of the “merit” is what class and race you’re born into is pretty common especially around those who are in a comfortable place.

$600 is pissing on people and telling them it’s rain. 2k and demanding they spend it as you see fit is pissing in their mouth and asking them to swallow. Help the people and let them do with it what they want.

Is it all going to go to amazon? A chunk of it yeah I bet so. But if it’s to buy what people need who the hell is anyone to tell them what to do? If theyre a freedom loving American that’s the thing right? The freedom to do what you want with your money. The cries of it being hoarded or spent incorrectly harken back to the Reagan “welfare queen” hysterics Americans are so prone to. Argue about the exception instead of focusing on the rule.

[Dion]

Moscow Mitch dashes hopes for $2,000 coronavirus relief checks

Washington — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday again rebuffed a push for the Senate to take up a bill increasing coronavirus relief checks to Americans from $600 to $2,000, saying instead that the increased direct payments would remain linked with nixing a legal shield for internet companies and creating a commission to examine election integrity.

"Here is the deal," McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor. "The Senate is not going to split apart the three issues that President Trump linked together just because Democrats are afraid to address two of them."

The Senate, the Kentucky Republican continued, "is not going to be bullied into rushing out more borrowed money into the hands of Democrats' rich friends who don't need the help."

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/polit...?ocid=msedgdhp

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Can someone explain to me why the US will put random things together in the same bill?

Doesn't it make the most sense to have bills deal with specific issues? Why would you link stimulius payments, internet regulation and defense spending in the same bill?

On the face of it, that doesn't make sense. What's the technical reasoning behind it (the actual reasoning is to kill a bill the exact say McConnell is doing it).

[Krovikan]

The COVID relief was attached to a spending bill to push it through easier due to the US procedures from what I understand.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Agreed.

If my wife and I receive a disbursement, I'm going to push for us to donate the entire amount to food banks and any other charitable group that will help the unemployed at the moment.

It's a tough situation, and I don't know that blindly throwing money at the problem is the best answer. Some of that money will go directly to families in need. Some of it will simply be used to pay for credit that has already been spent. Much of it will sit in people's bank accounts without fully circulating in the economy. I'm not sure how to fix that last part.

Maybe in the (distant) future digital currencies could provide a means for governments to issue stimulus funds that have a 'best-before' date. Still would not solve the problem but could help.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Maybe in the (distant) future digital currencies could provide a means for governments to issue stimulus funds that have a 'best-before' date. Still would not solve the problem but could help.

Like a hot potato, don’t be the one holding it when the clock strikes zero?

As long as I can pay my taxes with that so the govt loses out, might be an option

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Can someone explain to me why the US will put random things together in the same bill?

I would suppose that when it works, it's a way to bind two parties (or the House and the Senate) to a compromise or deal.