I absolutely agree that anyone out there working right now, and since this all began, deserves and has more than earned hazzard pay benefits. You won't find me disagreeing there at all.
I think everyone needs extra assistance right now. Everyone.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
I absolutely agree that anyone out there working right now, and since this all began, deserves and has more than earned hazzard pay benefits. You won't find me disagreeing there at all.
I think everyone needs extra assistance right now. Everyone.
Keep printing those bills. Why 3T? Why not 10T? Its just a matter of printing the bills these days. No intrinsic value behind it. Might as well give every american to print money at home.
How about make healthcare free? How about make education free? instead of printing this fake ass money that only helps in the very short term and biggest load goes to corporate anyways.
How about make healthcare free? How about make education free? instead of printing this fake ass money that only helps in the very short term and biggest load goes to corporate anyways.
Hell yeah. Who was the asshole who thought that one check of $1200 would be enough to pay the bills? Unemployment numbers continue to rise every day, so another stimulus package is needed.
They should be paying us monthly until this goes away and by the looking of things it won't until mid of next year if being generous. That one check of $1,200 isn't going to cut it.
It pays for itself through tax revenue generation. We lose more money than we're spending if we're not spending, if that makes sense.
Even if we weren't, our #3 concern (behind making sure people aren't dying, and that people have enough money to live) is making sure that money is circulating in the economy enough that all the businesses don't close. Can't re-open an economy that doesn't exist.
I don't think that's true (tax revenue from giving people money will fund the money being given out), but I'd be interested in hearing the argument.
The money they're giving you has already been taxed, then it's taxed when they give it to you, then it's taxed when it's spent. The taxes flow back to state and federal, and the money circulates in the economy and both keeps businesses alive and people employed to then make more money that is taxed and spent and taxed.
Giving us all $2000 a month is better for us and for the economy than giving corporations and billionaires huge payouts that they just buy stocks up with or hoard.
I'm not going to argue your second point, that it's better than giving huge corporate payouts, but I'm still not following the
???
Profit
part of it. What do you mean the money has already been taxed, then it's taxed when it's given to you? The stimulus has no taxes on it (nor should it), and the money comes straight from the government. It's taxed when (or if) it's spent, sure. The money circulates, sure.
The money they give you comes from tax money (so if you want you can already argue that it's ALL our money). As far as it not getting taxed when they give it to you, you're right I was thinking of the federal bonus to unemployment which is taxed. The $1200 wasn't, correct.
Essentially, the money comes from tax money that WAS ours. It's given back to us which we then spend and is taxed at several points from then on. That, plus other taxes, fills the pot back up. I don't think it's a direct return to the pot, I wouldn't think it would be anyway, so other taxes would have to be redirected to continue to fund the (in this case let's just call it) universal basic income program.
It help stimulate both citizens and local businesses which is nothing but positive, and our government can more than afford it (especially when we start talking about redirecting taxes from other programs like the military budget, for example).
It's just a wierd situation where every night in discord we have a few friends who are essential employees in very tough jobs and are making less than those of us sitting at home playing video games. I'm not saying people don't need it. I just know that it's a frustration point. I can understand why they feel like they're getting a raw deal. In fact one is putting in regular overtime and still making less.
We also have local businesses that are opening back up, maybe prematurely or businesses getting the paycheck protection and having their employees quit, get angry etc. Because they make more on unemployment amid the other obvious benefit of getting to stay home.
Obviously it probably points to the issue that people simply aren't being paid enough and that's the real Crux of the issue. It just makes me feel bad knowing people (friends especially) are busting hump for us but being dealt a bad hand anyway.
It's a wierd situation for me because I would say I'm definitely democratic socialist in my policy identifications etc. So I feel torn between, I'm glad people are being helped and taking care of and this really doesn't seem like a good implementation.
Last edited:
sir, could i have a moment to speak to you about modern monetary theory? i have pamphlets.
It won't reach him. MitchBitch says he's going to stop it dead in the Senate.
My parents already spouted bullshit about people not wanting to go back to work (at places like restaurants) because they "make a better living just mooching off the guvment checks" without any self-awareness that maybe, just maybe, those jobs should give better pay/incentives to get people off unemployment and back to work.
I know I went off on a small tangent, but what I meant to circle back to is this: I'm sure it's already a Faux News talking point that Dems want people on unemployment and reliant on the guvment to take care of them instead of opening the economy for the "greater good" or some nonsense.
Then you should be commenting on those who are getting a raw deal. Not those who are getting the $600 currently, because they should be getting it.
A week though? I mean... 600 untaxable plus additional benefits means that a lot of people are in a better position not working. That's problematic in my opinion. That's the exact, I would say unfounded socialism fear that has slowed down progress in our country made manifest. (Though it may work out not to be unfounded) Maybe I'm overthinking it. But it just feels wrong and feels like it will damage progress towards something like a UBI. It will also have to be repaid by younger generations. Anyway I'll digress because I feel like I'm just going in circles with people and it's kind of a moot point. It is what it is.
Damn that hits HARD because I know exactly what you're saying lol.
You'll get some extra Bravo points or a chance to have a potluck lol.
dont forget the 10% discount at your favorite chain restaurant!
Trump signs an executive order, forcing McDonald's to make the McDouble $1 again at all locations.
If they would have done 2k a month to every adult, it would be about the same in cost to all the bills they made. People would have money to pay rent/mortgage, and continue to buy stuff. Instead everything was given to the ruling class.
BTW that 2k a month would be for a year.
BTW that 2k a month would be for a year.
Is there a group in the world that has done more to kill and harm Americans than the modern republican party? To them it is better a million die in pain and agony than a single rich person be taxed.
I still find it absurd that people think the US will ever get better. You can not build a functional nation when at least 60 million people have dedicated their lives to destroying it.
Well this bill that the House wants would have paid basically for Yang's UBI for a year, and that isn't droping the safety net programs that Yang would have dropped. I was adding up all the bills done/proposed so far, which is about 6-7 trillion.
Its amazing we have had 5 bills done/proposed so far and barely anything has gone to help the 30-40 million people that will be in poverty in a few months. With that will be a massive increase in crime and bring on an America that I am not interested in living in.
User Banned (3 Days): Antagonistic and Condescending Behavior Against Another User
You're giving yourself way too much credit when you say you're "overthinking". It doesn't seem like thinking is your strong suit.
The point is to make sure that people have more than enough money to stay in, pay bills, and get supplies when supplies are scarce. We don't want people going out, we want them staying in. We don't want them worrying about pinching pennies to afford food or rent, feeling like they have to go out and endanger themselves and others to work. We don't want people anxious to get back to work. It's the entire point. God forbid people live comfortably at home during the worst pandemic in 100 years! God forbid people start to expect something more than being treated like trash their entire lives! What an awful precedent to set!
Oh and you're qualified to make that assertion? Sorry I didn't realize who I was talking to. When are you holding your lecture next? Or is it a TED talk? I'll be sure to tune in.
God what a jackass
I've been aggravated daily that I'm not receiving any kind of hazard pay. I hope this happens. Although this should have happened over a month ago.
McConnell has now already said there no chance this become law. It's DOA and the House vote on Friday is already meaningless
Isn't everything in American history paid for by younger generations? How is this any different? Money is a concept we created to ascribe value and tie the social order to, that's all it is. As long as the United States remains a world power then the concept of debt basically doesn't even matter. The USA and Americans own most of the national debt anyways via vehicles like Social Security trust fund (Who owns America's debt). Don't fall into the Republican logic trap where they tell you the debt is some looming problem it isn't, it's never getting paid not in some lump some anyway and as long as US Economic conditions remain positive in the long term it won't matter.
If the House is smart, they'll pass half a dozen bills like this one over the next six months. As our economy worsens, it will show the public the GOP doesn't care about them and maybe we can flip the Senate.
So Trump said it's dead on arrival but then offered no context. I wish he'd say specifically why he doesn't want the things in the bill.
He would have to know what's in the bill first. If McConnell pushes forward the exact same thing with a new wrapper, maybe then it could move forward without rancor or difficulty.
I saw the headline and clicked for details. It was literally just the headline.
Fiancée only has 7 weeks of unemployment left, so I wish someone would start talking seriously about a new stimulus in the Senate.
Yea, expected this first go around to be dead. Dems need to grab ahold and show em the Republicans are holding this up. I've actually had a few trumpers I work with talking about how people need more help. It won't affect all of them but once things get dire for their friends and families it'll help sway a few. And hopefully those numbers will make some of the GOP think twice.
Wishful thinking..but that's about the only chance we got.
Wishful thinking..but that's about the only chance we got.
He doesn't care what's in the bill. He cares that Democrats wrote it.
I've always said I think unemployment/disability should never actually pay more than what you make currently. Like you said, idk if it's necessarily right to make more money not working. What's the incentive to work then? Anyways may be an unpopular opinion around here but that's what I think. I'm totally fine with the benefits matching your previous employment salary though.
I know Bitch "turtle boi" McConnell is going to block it, but we really need this.
I don't think the basic principle of "a government works for it's people and should help them" is some "radical socialist idea", it's just a basic function of what any government should be. I will still never understand the people that sit there and go "but the mooching welfare queens!" as a reason to cut all aid programs.
I personally would not need the money from this but we could still benefit quite a lot from it, especially with a kid on the way.
I don't think the basic principle of "a government works for it's people and should help them" is some "radical socialist idea", it's just a basic function of what any government should be. I will still never understand the people that sit there and go "but the mooching welfare queens!" as a reason to cut all aid programs.
I personally would not need the money from this but we could still benefit quite a lot from it, especially with a kid on the way.
"Senate Republicans are significantly scaling back their tax cuts to billionaires, citing concerns about the cost."
Democrats are absolutely spineless.
OP
OP
Yamiche Alcindor on Twitter
“.@PressSec Kayleigh McEnany says President Trump has no "immediate plans" to pursue a phase four coronavirus bill. She said the $3 trillion House bill that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is supporting is a "nonstarter," is "quite odd" and is a "liberal wish list."”
twitter.com