Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Alhena

(3,030 posts)
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:24 PM May 2020

Sorry, but this "$2,000/month for everyone" is total crap

It makes me ashamed that Democrats proposed it. Government benefits should be about getting money to people who need it, not stuffing huge sums of money into the pockets of people who don't. This will all be paid for by the next generation, and also likely in inflation because the Federal Reserve is just going to monetize the debt.

Under the plan, someone making $110k a year, getting his salary just like before the pandemic, for some reason will be given $2,000 a month. That is pandering and vote-buying of the most transparent sort.

139 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sorry, but this "$2,000/month for everyone" is total crap (Original Post) Alhena May 2020 OP
Can I have yours? lame54 May 2020 #1
+1000000 jpak May 2020 #5
"As long as I get mine" is apparently all most care about Alhena May 2020 #6
Is that a yes? lame54 May 2020 #10
I think you misunderstand the point. Happy Hoosier May 2020 #15
This. EMERGENCY RELIEF doubling as STIMULUS distributed Hortensis May 2020 #115
I'm there myself Tink41 May 2020 #120
You're quite correct. Arthur_Frain May 2020 #79
It was part of pandemic plan Tink41 May 2020 #82
This message was self-deleted by its author Jamastiene May 2020 #107
Confused? Tink41 May 2020 #119
Sorry. I was agreeing, but it ended up in the wrong place. Jamastiene May 2020 #130
No worries: NT Tink41 May 2020 #131
I agree it's the same as health insurance Tribetime May 2020 #104
Exactly. Jamastiene May 2020 #105
Thank You For Saying So. It's Total Bullsh*t. Indykatie May 2020 #2
What if someone making 110k per year wants to quit their job to take care of aging parent(s)? roamer65 May 2020 #3
Well for this to work, people's situation must be documented, need established. So costs to emmaverybo May 2020 #12
You're against a universal basic income??? PTWB May 2020 #24
Yes. emmaverybo May 2020 #68
You must not know much about UBI then. PTWB May 2020 #80
If UBI is such an obviously brilliant strategy, explain why it has no political traction. brooklynite May 2020 #122
Opposition to UBI is hardly outrageous Codeine May 2020 #134
Then many people will fall through the cracks Happy Hoosier May 2020 #26
+1000 Happy Hoosier. MH1 May 2020 #43
I did not say or Imply that. I think a program to assist those who need help can be developed and emmaverybo May 2020 #70
Any effective measure must had two characteristics. Happy Hoosier May 2020 #93
Good argument for those of us who have concerns. emmaverybo May 2020 #99
And The Chances It Will Get Through The Senate Are ZERO nt sfstaxprep May 2020 #4
Less than zero with Mitch the Con. Wall Street not Main Street. SammyWinstonJack May 2020 #35
The cost alone will stop it ripcord May 2020 #128
Means testing is bullshit. I'm fine if everyone gets it. WhiskeyGrinder May 2020 #7
If they're going by 2109 tax returns, AirmensMom May 2020 #8
If the person making $110 in 2019 is unemployed in 2020 Yavin4 May 2020 #58
I think AirmensMom May 2020 #71
The discussion is that they shouldn't be. Yavin4 May 2020 #81
+1 KentuckyWoman May 2020 #98
I'll consider it haz pay for MyNameGoesHere May 2020 #9
I support it if the person is unemployed. Buckeye_Democrat May 2020 #11
What counts as "unemployed?" Happy Hoosier May 2020 #94
How about people that quit their jobs because they now make around $2000 per month ? MichMan May 2020 #137
OH! A WHOLE $2000/mo? Happy Hoosier May 2020 #139
By my quick math that 4 or 5 trillion a year madville May 2020 #13
Post removed Post removed May 2020 #18
So you're accusing Nancy Pelosi of selling snake oil?? Turin_C3PO May 2020 #31
Canada is doing this - we need to do it womanofthehills May 2020 #45
Yes they are. Wellstone ruled May 2020 #52
There is always money when corporations want it Bettie May 2020 #20
Or when it's time to go to war gratuitous May 2020 #27
Yes, that too Bettie May 2020 #30
Or when it's time to make lots more nukes womanofthehills May 2020 #125
We just dropped 3 trillion to save businesses. Happy Hoosier May 2020 #28
Let's just make it 10k a month then madville May 2020 #41
Are you going to TRY and understand at all? Happy Hoosier May 2020 #92
So at some point the political will is going to be there to take it away? MichMan May 2020 #112
There would also be offsets - money that won't have to be paid out in other ways. ooky May 2020 #56
4 or 5 trillion being added to the economy every year MissMillie May 2020 #116
What sort of fair system would you propose that determines who needs help? KY_EnviroGuy May 2020 #14
You raise a relevant point. The more restrictive it is the more people who really need it might fall totodeinhere May 2020 #64
Yes, and anyone like me that's known a number of people.... KY_EnviroGuy May 2020 #78
This will never get passed. Buckeyeblue May 2020 #16
I just get SS disability and have reasonable cost of living circumstances. I'd have to say I don't brewens May 2020 #17
I live off 12,000$ a year, I wouldn't turn it down Marrah_Goodman May 2020 #19
Same here I_UndergroundPanther May 2020 #126
Means testing will mean it's a welfare program. It should be for all or none. PSPS May 2020 #21
Howard Dean's campaign message was "Bill Gates deserves free health care..." brooklynite May 2020 #22
There are some sound economic reasons for healthy capitalism PufPuf23 May 2020 #23
what about me? qazplm135 May 2020 #25
It's to make sure everybody gets it. As it is now the repugs... brush May 2020 #29
So I am wondering if the OP is Chainfire May 2020 #32
Immaterial, as it is totally dead on arrival. Codeine May 2020 #33
So Canada can do it plus have free health care but USA....not so much womanofthehills May 2020 #75
"Canada can do it" is a simplistic Codeine May 2020 #101
"we CAN do it, but we won't" seems rather simplistic as well LanternWaste May 2020 #124
Any wealthy nation CAN do such a thing, Codeine May 2020 #132
Our CERB is taxable. And EllieBC May 2020 #102
Is it a bit too much for too many? Yep. Afromania May 2020 #34
It's about getting the most bang for your policy buck. meadowlander May 2020 #36
How about giving everyone the $2K and tax it back from high earners? Yavin4 May 2020 #47
No... it's not about individuals... Happy Hoosier May 2020 #95
I got screwed re: the $1200, so this pipe dream would be nice, especially jmg257 May 2020 #37
What happened? PTWB May 2020 #62
Made too much last year (just), even though I got furloughed. jmg257 May 2020 #69
You will be able to claim it on your 2020 taxes kelly1mm May 2020 #91
Ah thanks for that - will certainly do so! Cheers! Nt jmg257 May 2020 #114
Everybody has their OWN opinion i guess. bluestarone May 2020 #38
lol aidbo May 2020 #39
Would You Prefer a Prolonged, Severe Economic Depression? waterwatcher123 May 2020 #40
GOOD EXAMPLE of the logical fallacy known as False Dichotomy. Theres more than 2 options .. nt Kashkakat v.2.0 May 2020 #85
If we do not demand it will go to corporations/banks delisen May 2020 #42
Donate it then. LakeArenal May 2020 #44
+1. Exactly. LuckyCharms May 2020 #48
You could throw a hissy fit about it or simply tax the not needy next year and take it back. Yavin4 May 2020 #46
I am willing to.. mvd May 2020 #49
There is no way to separate, other by income level lettucebe May 2020 #50
This shows that you have absolutely no idea about what money is Blecht May 2020 #51
Kick and rec I_UndergroundPanther May 2020 #127
When President Obama did the payroll tax cut, I gave all the money to charity. Blue_true May 2020 #53
It can be easily taxed back from high income earners. n/t Yavin4 May 2020 #57
Means test on the back end. Help people now. SoonerPride May 2020 #54
+1 crickets May 2020 #55
Huh, sounds a lot like Socialism. HotTeaBag May 2020 #59
Pernie Danders never proposed a UBI. Andrew Yang did. SoonerPride May 2020 #60
It depnds on the reason for the payments. If they are designed to help needy people who are totodeinhere May 2020 #61
UBI is OK with me. aikoaiko May 2020 #63
Considering the crisis we're in, and realizing that most Americans live paycheck to paycheck stopbush May 2020 #65
There is literally not one single person who is properly educated about UBI that opposes it. PTWB May 2020 #66
Unemployment system has failed MoonlitKnight May 2020 #67
we would love it. We have a few small bills that would demtenjeep May 2020 #72
Don't worry, it will never pass. Our best shot at getting would have been in the first stimulus jalan48 May 2020 #73
de rec nt Celerity May 2020 #74
If we're all warriors ... GeorgeGist May 2020 #76
The point is that the money will be spent and pay for itself flamingdem May 2020 #77
And Another Thing!! Tink41 May 2020 #83
Take it down a few notches Sewa May 2020 #87
See Reply #82 Tink41 May 2020 #100
people who have enough money say things like this bigtree May 2020 #84
+1 EllieBC May 2020 #89
Billions to corporations and churches and no one complains that we can't afford it. Anything for Autumn May 2020 #86
THIS Jamastiene May 2020 #108
It's a STIMULUS plan SoCalDem May 2020 #88
Get back to us with equal concern over liberalhistorian May 2020 #90
You never hear "What about our children and grandchildren?" Jamastiene May 2020 #109
That'd be a few hundred more a month then what I get now. Kaleva May 2020 #96
Two things could happen BGBD May 2020 #97
We still haven't received our stimulus check, so all of this is hokey pokey to us. Baitball Blogger May 2020 #103
When Obama I_UndergroundPanther May 2020 #129
Way to cut your nose off to spsite your face. Jamastiene May 2020 #106
What is the evidential basis for saying that "half the rich don't even pay taxes"? brooklynite May 2020 #121
There are three proposals JustAnotherGen May 2020 #110
The time is right to enact the Farseer plan. TheFarseer May 2020 #111
Free college for ALL regardless of income BlueLucy May 2020 #113
This. A thousand times this. nt Codeine May 2020 #133
And this is why we will never fix the problem whistler162 May 2020 #117
There's a reason Yang was never more than a fringe presidential candidate Tarc May 2020 #118
The Ds who are proposing this are truly visionaries. They are looking at our stopbush May 2020 #123
These are extraordinary times RussBLib May 2020 #135
The people who are still working will never go for it then Calculating May 2020 #136
Especially those making that much now or a little more ? MichMan May 2020 #138

Alhena

(3,030 posts)
6. "As long as I get mine" is apparently all most care about
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:31 PM
May 2020

who gives a damn if the next generation has to pay for it, right? It's not like the Social Security trust fund is scheduled to run out of money in 15 years anyway, right? Oh wait, it is.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
15. I think you misunderstand the point.
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:39 PM
May 2020

Last edited Sun May 10, 2020, 11:00 AM - Edit history (1)

The point is that money will be spent. And it will directly benefit the economy. Generally speaking the idea
is to get money to people quickly and to not leave any gaps. I make 6 figures... or at least I do when working. I am furloughed right now. I do have some savings, but am chewing through that right smartly. In a few weeks a $2,000 check might stand between me and missing a mortgage payment.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
115. This. EMERGENCY RELIEF doubling as STIMULUS distributed
Sun May 10, 2020, 07:47 AM
May 2020

from the household level across the nation in all communities. As opposed to the Republicans' attempt to funnel as much as they can get away with directly to big business.

Others have suggested Alhena could deal with personal shame of receiving unneeded relief by donating instead of spending it. If so, stimulus would be best carried out by donating locally to a smallish local organization or organizations that hopefully would itself continue stimulus through spending locally.

Tink41

(537 posts)
120. I'm there myself
Sun May 10, 2020, 09:11 AM
May 2020

75 grand for about 6 months of work last year. As of today my income for the year is probably less than 4000. I don't see myself going back anytime soon. I work trade shows, conventions.

Arthur_Frain

(1,861 posts)
79. You're quite correct.
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:10 PM
May 2020

Human nature. Greed. First thing I noticed on this board “gimme my snaps!”. It’s a shame that spans both liberal and conservative folk.

There are always lots of those people. “Who gives a damn? I do! Make damn sure you give me my money.”

Tink41

(537 posts)
82. It was part of pandemic plan
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:27 PM
May 2020

This is basically every country's piece of a pandemic plan. IIRC the plans were posted on this very website. Every country had a universal income to be enacted during a pandemic. None of it is new, not even the stimulus.The stimulus should have never occurred it was just a straight monthly income.
I'm really surprised the majority here have not seen it.

Response to Tink41 (Reply #82)

Tink41

(537 posts)
119. Confused?
Sun May 10, 2020, 09:06 AM
May 2020

Why is this your reply to me? I'm well aware of the issue. I'm pointing out that the monthly income IS outlined in a country by country plan for a future pandemic. What I can't remember is who published it. Could have been the WHO.

Tribetime

(4,710 posts)
104. I agree it's the same as health insurance
Sun May 10, 2020, 01:45 AM
May 2020

I would like to see members of Congress and Senate be the last people to get Healthcare. Maybe that would light a fire under their ass

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
105. Exactly.
Sun May 10, 2020, 04:32 AM
May 2020

You can BET the rich won't turn it down. They get this kind of stuff all the time. Why should we do without because they will get it too. They ALREADY get zero taxes in a lot of cases and live off the taxes we pay in. Our government is overly stingy with our tax money when it comes to those of us who need money to get through a crisis they usually created through mismanagement.

The LEAST they could do is offer us something during this latest, biggest crisis ever. The rich are ALWAYS gonna get theirs. Just because they might get it too, doesn't mean we should do without it.

roamer65

(36,747 posts)
3. What if someone making 110k per year wants to quit their job to take care of aging parent(s)?
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:30 PM
May 2020

They should have a basic income if they make that choice.

emmaverybo

(8,144 posts)
12. Well for this to work, people's situation must be documented, need established. So costs to
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:36 PM
May 2020

administrate. I am absolutely against giveaways to those who do not need.

 

PTWB

(4,131 posts)
80. You must not know much about UBI then.
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:10 PM
May 2020

What logical, well-reasoned arguments do you use to support such an outrageous position?

 

Codeine

(25,586 posts)
134. Opposition to UBI is hardly outrageous
Sun May 10, 2020, 01:51 PM
May 2020

in that it is pretty much the default position of most of the world at this moment. How many large-scale UBI programs are in place worldwide? The answer to that question underscores the fact that it is by no means widely-supported as an economic policy.

Even though I support some form of UBI myself, I wouldn’t characterize opposition to it as outrageous or even particularly unreasonable. There are valid and convincing arguments both for and against UBI.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
26. Then many people will fall through the cracks
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:47 PM
May 2020

And payment will be delayed and administrative costs soar. And in the end many needy people will still be left out in the cold. But hey worth it if no one benefits who doesn’t deserve it, right?

MH1

(17,600 posts)
43. +1000 Happy Hoosier.
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:45 PM
May 2020

Between the necessary admin costs and the b.s. of chasing "fraud", many people who need it won't be helped, and the program will cost as much as if it were given to everyone. Plus the constant political games-playing over where lines are drawn.

May as well just give it to everyone and maybe some people will think harder about the social responsibility value of their job, rather than just needing to keep it to pay bills.

emmaverybo

(8,144 posts)
70. I did not say or Imply that. I think a program to assist those who need help can be developed and
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:59 PM
May 2020

implemented. Can come a number of ways—mortgage relief, health bill relief, changing eligibility for existing assistance of all types, restoring existing programs like ACA...

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
93. Any effective measure must had two characteristics.
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:46 PM
May 2020

1) It must be FAST.
2) It must favor broad saturation to avoid people falling through the cracks.


In the end, that will mean some people who don't need it might get access to benefits. For individuals, who care!? WE're not talking huge amounts of money on an individual basis here. The fact that some surgeon might be $2K she doesn't need is much less of a problem to me than a retail clerk who can;t pay the rent because some complex rules means she slips between the cracks. For a lot of people, paying the rent/mortgage, basic utilities, and buying food is at risk. At current processes are extremely slow and geared to exclude as many people as possible.

ripcord

(5,537 posts)
128. The cost alone will stop it
Sun May 10, 2020, 11:03 AM
May 2020
According to Social Security Wage Statistics, 90.67% of all wage earners in America earn less than $100,000 per year.

Just counting those wage earners, and many Americans that earned wages in 2018 are out of work, this would send a payment to at least 152 million Americans each month.

And if each of those Americans were just a single filer with no children, that’s $304,000,000,000 in total payments each and every month. And that doesn’t even consider the millions of Americans who don’t earn wages and pay into Social Security!


https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimwang/2020/05/08/2000-per-person-and-2000-per-child-monthly-economic-crisis-support-act-would-send-payments-to-over-90-of-americans/#4fcabc233977

AirmensMom

(14,648 posts)
8. If they're going by 2109 tax returns,
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:32 PM
May 2020

it's possible that the person who made $110K a year is unemployed this year. They might have more savings than people who made less, but maybe not. They still have their bills to pay. But if it helps the person making $20K a year, even if that person is still working, I'm OK with it. It might take some practice to figure out how best to help the people who need it most.

Yavin4

(35,446 posts)
58. If the person making $110 in 2019 is unemployed in 2020
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:32 PM
May 2020

the on their tax return for 2021, they will be able to keep the $2000 because their income in 2020 was $0.

Yavin4

(35,446 posts)
81. The discussion is that they shouldn't be.
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:22 PM
May 2020

The money should be issued to everyone now. Tax it back from the high earners next year. We are making things far more complicated than they have to be.

Buckeye_Democrat

(14,857 posts)
11. I support it if the person is unemployed.
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:35 PM
May 2020

It could be a lower amount, like the current "poverty level", which is about half that amount each month for an individual.

Incentive to work should still exist for nearly everyone with that amount of money.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
94. What counts as "unemployed?"
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:48 PM
May 2020

Doies it include gig workers? Self employed? Part timers? People who have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet (do they get compensation for each job lost)? People who are technically still employed but have major hours cut? People who were in a job for relatively short amount of time? Our unemployment system is full of holes.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
139. OH! A WHOLE $2000/mo?
Sun May 10, 2020, 11:37 PM
May 2020

American cash?

For a full time worker that's less than $12/hr. Hardly rolling int he dough.

If they wanna quit their jobs for the duration of the pandemic, then they can be my guest.

madville

(7,412 posts)
13. By my quick math that 4 or 5 trillion a year
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:39 PM
May 2020

If 200 million people receive it. Completely unaffordable. How are they proposing to pay for it?

Response to madville (Reply #13)

womanofthehills

(8,771 posts)
45. Canada is doing this - we need to do it
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:04 PM
May 2020

It is a serious proposal. Nancy wants to give the money to the employers but lots of us are self employed. Don’t you realize how badly the American people are hurting right now?

Bettie

(16,126 posts)
20. There is always money when corporations want it
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:42 PM
May 2020

but the second it is about people, suddenly, everyone is all "how will we pay for this!".

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
27. Or when it's time to go to war
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:49 PM
May 2020

There was no "how we gonna pay for it" when the Bush administration sent the troops off first to Afghanistan and then to Iran. And we're still there, if anyone cares to look. Republicans cut taxes once before we went and again in 2017. Those cuts went overwhelmingly to the wealthiest Americans. Trillions of dollars funneled into a bottomless hole. Anyone calling bullshit concerned about how we're paying for that?

Bettie

(16,126 posts)
30. Yes, that too
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:53 PM
May 2020

but for human people? A little as possible, nothing if they can get away with that.

Frankly, help directly to people is immediately stimulative to the economy. It creates economic activity in the communities where people live.

But, I know, I know, corporations and bombs are WAY more important than human beings.

womanofthehills

(8,771 posts)
125. Or when it's time to make lots more nukes
Sun May 10, 2020, 10:48 AM
May 2020

Like $19.8 billion to ramp up plutonium pits at Los Alamos National Labs.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
28. We just dropped 3 trillion to save businesses.
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:50 PM
May 2020

And this is not a permanent proposal. And it’s only an affordability problem if we refuse to make use of all our resources. Hint: we have a fiat currency.

madville

(7,412 posts)
41. Let's just make it 10k a month then
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:26 PM
May 2020

If we can just create money out of thin air. Then everyone will have a six figure income, no more financial problems for anyone.

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
92. Are you going to TRY and understand at all?
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:41 PM
May 2020

You sounds like republican, worshiping at the alter of capital.

This would be a SHORT TERM measure. And you want to create enough new currency to compensate for lost economic activity. You don't want to flood the the zone. Right now, economic activity is hampered and GDP is contracting. We need to replace the lost wealth, but put it int he hands of consumers, not the capital class.

MichMan

(11,974 posts)
112. So at some point the political will is going to be there to take it away?
Sun May 10, 2020, 07:39 AM
May 2020

If enacted. I don't believe any politician is ever going to suggest that it is now time for it to be stopped.

ooky

(8,929 posts)
56. There would also be offsets - money that won't have to be paid out in other ways.
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:29 PM
May 2020

For example unemployment benefits, food stamps welfare benefits etc that we are already paying out.

I'm not saying I totally support it for everyone, just that there is other math to consider. I'm not sure if I support UBI for everyone or not. I do support it for people who don't have income coming in now.

MissMillie

(38,581 posts)
116. 4 or 5 trillion being added to the economy every year
Sun May 10, 2020, 08:27 AM
May 2020

Even if only the bottom 80% actually spend it, think of the job creation!

And think of the economic security it would create for those who have never had it.

I understand the reservations people have. And to be honest, I'm not 100% sure how I feel about it. A large part of me, however, is REALLY tired of trickle-down economics. So for me, it's either re-write the tax-code to reward corporations, businesses and employers to pay a living wage and health insurance (and make them pay higher taxes if they don't), or institute Medicare for all, or both.

Until people actually have money to spend, the economy will only work for a very small group of people.

totodeinhere

(13,059 posts)
64. You raise a relevant point. The more restrictive it is the more people who really need it might fall
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:45 PM
May 2020

through the cracks and end up short. So it might be easier and more efficient to just give it to everybody whether they really need it or not. That would ensure that the largest number of people who really need it get it. You know, if I really need the $2000 monthly to survive then I doubt if i would care if someone else who doesn't need it as much as I do gets it as well.

KY_EnviroGuy

(14,494 posts)
78. Yes, and anyone like me that's known a number of people....
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:07 PM
May 2020

that have applied for food assistance or for disability knows how baited my questions is. It's pure hell by design.

Many that need it most also don't normally file taxes due to limited income, so IRS records won't do the job although that could be used to not pay out to millionaires. Of course, that would set them off into a fury.

So, we in America really do not have an equitable system in place to distribute common wealth to those in need during a national emergency and charities cannot fill the void.

There's an interesting irony to this situation. We do indeed have a massively efficient system in place for distributing the common wealth upward during normal times.

Buckeyeblue

(5,502 posts)
16. This will never get passed.
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:40 PM
May 2020

At most we will get a second round of the stimulus. But the point of this is to help those that need it to pay bills. For others it's to entice them to spend it. Get the money in the economy.

brewens

(13,622 posts)
17. I just get SS disability and have reasonable cost of living circumstances. I'd have to say I don't
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:41 PM
May 2020

really need it, just like the $1200. I guess they want to give it to everyone so assholes that really don't need it won't be pissed. I'd be dancing if I even got an extra $500 a month and that would have me in the clear pretty quick. It would turn into a few thousand eventually by eliminating what little debt I have.

Marrah_Goodman

(1,586 posts)
19. I live off 12,000$ a year, I wouldn't turn it down
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:41 PM
May 2020

I forget what it is like to not worry constantly about making it through the month.

I_UndergroundPanther

(12,480 posts)
126. Same here
Sun May 10, 2020, 11:01 AM
May 2020

That 2000 would help a lot.
I wouldn't be broke 3 weeks out of every month. If it was monthly my stress levels would go down and I could actually save a bit of money for emergencies. On SSI there is no way I can save.
It would feel good to feel a bit more financially secure for once. I could give money to places like the humane society like I always wanted to,and Dems too.

brooklynite

(94,737 posts)
22. Howard Dean's campaign message was "Bill Gates deserves free health care..."
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:45 PM
May 2020

The theory was that, it’s not important if he NEEDS something provided by the Government, it’s important that everyone GETS whatever it is from the Government, so it’s not seen as a “welfare for the poor” item that doesn’t have support the next time appropriations are made.

PufPuf23

(8,839 posts)
23. There are some sound economic reasons for healthy capitalism
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:46 PM
May 2020

why subsistent payments are wise.

I am too weary to extrapolate.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
25. what about me?
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:47 PM
May 2020

I made 130K in 18 and 19, and retired in January from the military. Now I make less than half that but I don't qualify.

Give everyone the money, then tax it next year.

Easy peasy.

brush

(53,871 posts)
29. It's to make sure everybody gets it. As it is now the repugs...
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:51 PM
May 2020

in Congress make sure the rich can siphon off most of it and only trickles get down to the needy. Also the red states have rigged their unemployment system so hardly anyone can get an application through. Dems just have to work around all the roadblocks Moscow Mitch and the no-empathy repug governors put in place to stop the people who really need help in staving off the wolf at the door.

And believe me, the money will be spent right away and spur the economy so think deeper than what you OP says. A whole lot of the jobs lost are not coming back because a lot of those businesses are not going to come back either.

Chainfire

(17,643 posts)
32. So I am wondering if the OP is
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:56 PM
May 2020

is fine with spending billions on private businesses, but not on the people who work for them. Do you suppose that some of the businesses who got the money didn't really need it to survive? Someone needs to be looking at the miles long lines of cars with people without money, getting free food for their families. People in the richest country in the world are going hungry.

So far the government has given lavishly to business and niggardly to the workers. That is the nation we have become.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
124. "we CAN do it, but we won't" seems rather simplistic as well
Sun May 10, 2020, 10:36 AM
May 2020

(this is where you pretend one simplistic statement is much more weighty and valid than another)

 

Codeine

(25,586 posts)
132. Any wealthy nation CAN do such a thing,
Sun May 10, 2020, 01:44 PM
May 2020

if they choose to prioritize their economy so as to do so. Would it work as promised without the creation of as many problems as it solves? I’m not sure anyone can say with certainty.

I contend that we can do it. I do not necessarily contend that we should do it - or that we should not do it, for that matter - merely that it is achievable should we choose to enact said policy.

EllieBC

(3,042 posts)
102. Our CERB is taxable. And
Sun May 10, 2020, 01:32 AM
May 2020

they immediately approved everyone who applied. They’ll properly process the claims later. If you owe, you’ll pay it back.

And honestly it’s barely helping most people as our COL is crazy in most parts.

Afromania

(2,771 posts)
34. Is it a bit too much for too many? Yep.
Sat May 9, 2020, 06:57 PM
May 2020

If anything they are pandering to the greedy people on the Republican side that would usually claim of against just helping those that need help. It's a bribe to let us help those that need it without them realizing it. I expect the numbers will end up being considerably less when this happens. I'd prefer they take back the money from the corps before creating new funny money but as long as they are going to do it is rather real life people get some money as well.

meadowlander

(4,406 posts)
36. It's about getting the most bang for your policy buck.
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:00 PM
May 2020

You also have to factor in the cost of administering means testing particularly for self-employed people whose salaries could be seasonal or could vary significantly from year to year. How many people do you need to hire to assess applications and what is the cost in lost time of making everyone apply for it and prove their income?

I haven't done the math in this example, but in some cases the cost of administering means testing is more than the cost of just giving the benefit to everyone.

The middle class person who didn't lose their job is still likely to spend the money on goods and services creating more demand, creating more jobs for the person that lost theirs. Or maybe having a secure income will give them the confidence to quit the pointless corporate job they hate and start their own business which will eventually hire people.

So it's not like that spending doesn't also, at least in part, benefit the person that did lose their job.

Yavin4

(35,446 posts)
47. How about giving everyone the $2K and tax it back from high earners?
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:09 PM
May 2020

Everyone making over $100K has to pay back the money?

Happy Hoosier

(7,392 posts)
95. No... it's not about individuals...
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:52 PM
May 2020

... and that's a problem with a lot of economic thinking. In this case, it's about blunting GDP loss by putting money into the hands of people most likely to spend it as quickly as possible.

Yes, it means the top 10% may get some cash they do not need. But it also means the bottom 90% get a cash influx exactly when they, and the economy, need it. THAT is why it is more efficient. Any other process would take months to implement, longer to qualify, and it would STILL miss people who need it.

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
37. I got screwed re: the $1200, so this pipe dream would be nice, especially
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:00 PM
May 2020

Once the $600 govt UI drops out.

But I aint holding my breath.

kelly1mm

(4,734 posts)
91. You will be able to claim it on your 2020 taxes
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:26 PM
May 2020

As a credit if you qualify based on your 2020 income. The actual law structured it as a per person tax credit for 2020 payable in advance based on 2019/2018 income (with no repayment if you somehow don’t qualify based on 2020 income).

bluestarone

(17,043 posts)
38. Everybody has their OWN opinion i guess.
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:03 PM
May 2020

You'll see a bunch here soon! I guess YOU could give yours back, and let the Millionaires or Billionaires have it! They been getting a pretty hefty share so far!

waterwatcher123

(144 posts)
40. Would You Prefer a Prolonged, Severe Economic Depression?
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:25 PM
May 2020

This is a classic Keynesian approach to an economy in a tailspin. Give money to people who actually spend it, versus to businesses who will not expand, hire back employees or even continue without any demand. It is either some version of this strategy or food shelves, soup kitchens, mortgage defaults, credit card and student loan defaults and all of the societal ills associated with economic hardship.

delisen

(6,044 posts)
42. If we do not demand it will go to corporations/banks
Sat May 9, 2020, 07:40 PM
May 2020

The first payouts plus treasury manipulations were pandering. The massive tax cut for the rich and big corporations before that -that was pandering.

We only get out of this mess if we run our country for people not things.

Yavin4

(35,446 posts)
46. You could throw a hissy fit about it or simply tax the not needy next year and take it back.
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:07 PM
May 2020

If your gross income is over $100K, then your taxes will have an additional $2000 hit.

mvd

(65,180 posts)
49. I am willing to..
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:12 PM
May 2020

see those people getting the checks in these emergency times. It makes the process easier for those who really need it. Job loss can also affect a large swath of people.

Let’s get help out to people instead of big corporations for a change.

lettucebe

(2,337 posts)
50. There is no way to separate, other by income level
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:13 PM
May 2020

so, it will have a limit to income level. No way they can pick-n-choose who gets it or not other than that

Blecht

(3,803 posts)
51. This shows that you have absolutely no idea about what money is
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:14 PM
May 2020

Money is an artificial construct. Austerity and national debt concerns are means to unnecessary suffering in the world; they are used to keep people enslaved to the 0.1%.

If this plan were implemented, more people would realize it. Minting the two one-trillion dollar coins would mean that there would be no future debt to repay.

It makes much more sense to do this than to prop up Wall Street. That is what is "total crap".

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
53. When President Obama did the payroll tax cut, I gave all the money to charity.
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:17 PM
May 2020

I made enough that I did not need the money, so I added it to what I was already giving. You assume that all high earning people are all assholes, many will simply give the money to people that really need it.

 

HotTeaBag

(1,206 posts)
59. Huh, sounds a lot like Socialism.
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:33 PM
May 2020

Seems to me that Democrats couldn't run away from that word fast enough when that weird little guy Hernie Manders or something was taking about it just a month or so ago.

totodeinhere

(13,059 posts)
61. It depnds on the reason for the payments. If they are designed to help needy people who are
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:38 PM
May 2020

out of work due to no fault of their own because of the pandemic then you have a point. But that may not be the purpose of the payments. If the payments are designed to stimulate the economy then the more people it goes to the better regardless of the financial means of the recipients.

stopbush

(24,396 posts)
65. Considering the crisis we're in, and realizing that most Americans live paycheck to paycheck
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:47 PM
May 2020

I am more than fine with the relative HANDFUL of Americans earning $110,000 a year who would be eligible for an additional $24,000 a year in relief payments.

I’d rather the Feds take quick, broad-based actions that directly help millions, rather than waste time by clutching their pearls in an attempt to exclude this or that group of citizens for this or that arbitrary reason because someone splits hairs over what is and isn’t fair.

MoonlitKnight

(1,584 posts)
67. Unemployment system has failed
Sat May 9, 2020, 08:53 PM
May 2020

This is the solution. Easy to implement and gets money into the economy.

It doesn’t have to stay at $2,000 a month. It can be indexed to prior month GDP. Essentially the payments cover the lost GDP.

We already tried the old way of trickledown and it has once again failed. We just burned several trillion dollars without much benefit to people.

We need a massive infrastructure bill first. Focus on broadband service, housing, improved transit, climate change, and building a new realistic economy. Couple with UBI and universal healthcare not tied to employment and you will see the largest economic and entrepreneurial boom in history.

 

demtenjeep

(31,997 posts)
72. we would love it. We have a few small bills that would
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:02 PM
May 2020

go away if we got even a couple months of it.

That would mean I can retire a year earlier. I would be so much better off.


jalan48

(13,886 posts)
73. Don't worry, it will never pass. Our best shot at getting would have been in the first stimulus
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:05 PM
May 2020

package, before the big corporations got their money and we still had some bargaining power.

flamingdem

(39,328 posts)
77. The point is that the money will be spent and pay for itself
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:07 PM
May 2020

It's the economy and how it really does work. Consumer spending.

Tink41

(537 posts)
83. And Another Thing!!
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:35 PM
May 2020

Quit making posts complaining and shitting all over anything that will benefit the working class. Start bitching about the small business loans that didn't go to small businesses, tax cuts for the rich etc.... Fuck.

Sewa

(1,259 posts)
87. Take it down a few notches
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:48 PM
May 2020

The poster is making a valid point. There use to be a time when the leftist supporter freedom of thought

Tink41

(537 posts)
100. See Reply #82
Sun May 10, 2020, 12:51 AM
May 2020

You can take it down a few notches. Nothing to make a point about, it's in the original pandemic plan!! Every country, we aren't special

bigtree

(86,005 posts)
84. people who have enough money say things like this
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:35 PM
May 2020

...local economies are so depressed that it's affecting most every family, most of us working poor.

And it's the most effective way to disperse money into the economy, the fastest method. Every economist worth their pay knows this.

Majorities across ideological spectrum, 3/4 of swing state voters want (need) more direct payments

Autumn

(45,120 posts)
86. Billions to corporations and churches and no one complains that we can't afford it. Anything for
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:46 PM
May 2020

people and no, we can't afford that.

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
108. THIS
Sun May 10, 2020, 06:01 AM
May 2020

Don't forget bombs. Our government never complains about bombs costing too much.

They only ever complain about how much things cost when the middle class or poor might get something. When it is their rich buddies, most of whom do not pay taxes because they either roll it up in charities, corporations, or banks outside of the US, our government cannot wait to open the pocketbook full of our tax dollars to redistribute wealth to their 1%er buddies.

When it might help the middle class or poor, ALL OF A SUDDEN, it is a major problem. The US government has mismanaged our tax dollars for ages and created a massive debt. The US government is the stingiest government in the world when it comes to its own people.

The rest of the countries in the west have governments that use their tax dollars to give them healthcare without a racket of "health insurance" in between the people and healthcare. The rest of the counties in the west are supporting their citizens through a UBI through this pandemic. They just have that and don't have to worry about homelessness or dying of something because they cannot afford healthcare.

Yet, here in America, a bunch of stingy asses have bought into the Republican claptrap of "this costs too much. How will our grandchildren pay for this?"

Uhm, they won't, just like we aren't paying for it. They have been using that excuse long enough now that another generation is here and no one is paying for it still. Stop using that excuse to pull at people's heart strings about their grandkids.

The deficit/debt has been there for decades, at least, now and keeps growing under every Republican, even more under them than under Democrats, most of the time. No one will pay for it. "Our children and grandchildren" get thrown at us like in 50 years, they will each of a sudden get a trillion dollar bill in the mail.

We only ever hear that when someone suggests giving the middle class and poor some of our tax dollars back. We never hear it except when it might benefit the poor and middle class. If they give our tax dollars to corporations or the uber rich, no one says a word. *crickets* about the debt and the grandkids are never brought up. Our government knows how to play on people's emotions and people fall for it Every. Single. Time.

Decades of giving to corporations and the uber rich is what created the massive debt our government has in the first place.

"What about the children and grandchildren?" This has been going on long enough that we ARE the children and grandchildren now.

SoCalDem

(103,856 posts)
88. It's a STIMULUS plan
Sat May 9, 2020, 09:55 PM
May 2020

People will NOT be rushing out to "start-up the economy" for a very long time.

It would need to be a limited timeframe and be available without flaming hoops or distribution by "benevolent overlords" such as CEOs, Bosses, Bankers, Specific politicians.

It's meant to be direct relief..so people actually have CASH to BUY stuff and services.

I would cut it off for some sectors..higher-income people who derive adequate income from investments or for upper-level folks without mortgages.

liberalhistorian

(20,819 posts)
90. Get back to us with equal concern over
Sat May 9, 2020, 10:04 PM
May 2020

the nearly 70 percent of the budget that goes for military spending and the tax breaks for corporations that amount to businesses like Amazon paying no taxes on eleven billion dollars in PROFIT, and then, maybe, we can talk and I might consider listening.

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
109. You never hear "What about our children and grandchildren?"
Sun May 10, 2020, 06:08 AM
May 2020

when it is to buy a bomb, give corporations freebies and take no taxes from them, or give the 1% freebies and take very little tax from them.

Our government has been mismanaging our tax dollars by giving them to the uber rich and the 1%ers and bomb manufacturers for ages now. Those classes of people and bombs getting massive payouts from the US government are the reason we are in the debt we are in now.

It has been going on long enough that people should realize the "What about our children and grandchildren? How are they going to pay for this in the future?" is NOW. That "future" is already NOW. We ARE the children and grandchildren NOW. Nobody is paying that off, ever. They just use that as a way to pull at people's heartstrings about their kids and grandkids and people fall for it every. single. time. It never fails.

And that has been going on long enough that we ARE the children and grandchildren now. How long are Americans going to keep falling for that when they realize we ARE the grandchildren by now. I'm guessing forever, because Americans do NOT want to wake up. How long can we look at other countries treating their citizens like human beings with basic rights like healthcare and a way to pay rent and buy food and STILL buy into the claptrap reverse child psychology our government uses on us while they live off the money we paid in taxes, vote themselves pay raises every years, turn working in the government as a lifelong career of siphoning money off taxpayers to enrich themselves, then turn around and tell us we don't deserve anything in return for that tax money.

The relationship between the US government and its citizens is one of child abuse just like the relationship between Democrats and Republicans is like spousal abuse.

The psychology used makes it so the US government gives massive amounts of money to the uber rich, corporations, or to make more bombs then turns around and tells us we don't deserve anything in return.

That was OUR money in the first place. Yet, they treat us like children asking for a toy.

No, how about enough money to get us through a crisis that didn't need to be so bad if Trump and most of the rest of our government hadn't dismissed it as a hoax and refused to do enough to keep it from crashing our economy and our personal finances and putting far more of us into harm's way than needed to be put in harm's way. Trump just shipped a bunch of ventilators and PPE to Russia. Our own hospitals were making their own masks and making do in some cases with everything from welding masks to Halloween masks. Something is WAY wrong here.

The psychology used by Republicans beats Democrats over the head over sex scanals (OMG, another Democrat had sex, the horror?!?!), then turns around and kills people, bombs people, maims people, starves children while protecting a few cells who are not even fetuses yet, then the Democrats stand down and let them do it over and over and over again, to appease them, to coddle them some more. Now, we have Trump doing whatever he pleases and still we can't do anything about him. We MUST take the Republican's abuse, because what can we do? It is just like a spousal abuse situation between the two parties. Nothing is EVER done about Republicans when they do horrible stuff to others. Nothing.

One thing I will give the US government: To be so ineffectual handling a pandemic, they sure are effective at using psychology to keep Americans thinking we don't deserve anything in return for what we give our government year after year. They are especially great at brainwashing people to believe our tax dollars are to pay their salaries and redistribute the wealth to the already wealthy. They callour tax dollars handouts if it might help the poor and middle class. They actgetting anything at all in return for the money we give them year after year makes us freeloaders. It is OUR money in the first place that they keep telling us we should not have. It is not like we are children asking for an extra toy. We just want to survive. They need to learn that killing and/or weakening "the help" means they will have to learn to do for themselves, and so will their rich buddies.

 

BGBD

(3,282 posts)
97. Two things could happen
Sat May 9, 2020, 11:56 PM
May 2020

Either Republicans go for it and the Democrats are on record as having pushed 2,000 bucks into everyones pocket each month or they don't go for it and Republicans are on record as having kept 2000 buck a month out of everyones pocket.

Pretty good position to be in during an election.

I_UndergroundPanther

(12,480 posts)
129. When Obama
Sun May 10, 2020, 11:07 AM
May 2020

Sent out stimulus checks there was none of this confusion republicans have caused that time.

This delay game shows what republicans value,more for themselves and the 1%

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
106. Way to cut your nose off to spsite your face.
Sun May 10, 2020, 04:40 AM
May 2020

The rich are ALWAYS going to get money from our government. That is how it has been working for ages now. The rich are ALWAYS going to get theirs. They always do. Half of them don't even have to pay taxes. They always get money hand over fist.

Our government is only stingy when it comes to the middle class and poor. They complain about giving money to the education system to even feed poor children, who might not eat at all without those school breakfasts and/or lunches. Our government complains when it comes to helping those of us who are not already rich. They complain and call us freeloaders for using our tax dollars to help us any at all, normally.

Yet, they are always generous when it comes to giving the rich money and they never complain about that. Corporations and the uber rich never have to listen to complaints or get called freeloaders when our government falls all over itself to give them more and more money and benefits.

Why stop our government from finally, FINALLY, helping people who need it? The rich will be getting money from them by default, with no complaints from our government ANYHOW, whether or not WE do.


Just because the rich are going to get money too doesn't mean the rest of us don't need it. You might not need it, but a lot of us do. I'll take yours if you don't want it. I could use it.

TheFarseer

(9,326 posts)
111. The time is right to enact the Farseer plan.
Sun May 10, 2020, 07:24 AM
May 2020

Give everyone a million dollars. The money will all be borrowed and it will be taxed at normal rates. Then default on the debt. Our credit will be garbage but we will have huge tax receipts. We can now loan out money and live off the interest plus tax recipts from subsequent years.

BlueLucy

(1,609 posts)
113. Free college for ALL regardless of income
Sun May 10, 2020, 07:43 AM
May 2020

is also pandering and vote buying. Eliminating ALL student debt regardless of your income is the ONLY reason some of my friends supported Bernie. Middle class white liberals who don't know how privileged they are to even have student debt. Where I come from, we had to quit going to high school, get a low paying job in order to help the family prevent being homeless. When you grow up in poverty it's hard to even graduate high school. It makes me sick to see these upper middle class white liberals demand eliminating their student debt.

 

whistler162

(11,155 posts)
117. And this is why we will never fix the problem
Sun May 10, 2020, 08:40 AM
May 2020

$2,000/month to everyone in the US of A IF ALL, including businesses, pay into the fund the same percentage of their income including the $2,000/month. It could if, and I know I am delusional, eliminate UI and SSI if done correctly.

Right now the system is shattered so let us actually recast it instead of gorilla glue, more like chewing gum and baling wire, it back together.

You just earn the $2000/month and the tax is 5% you pay $100/month into the system
You make $20000/month you pay $1000/month into the system.

We need to build a better safety net.

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
118. There's a reason Yang was never more than a fringe presidential candidate
Sun May 10, 2020, 08:44 AM
May 2020

This



is not policy.

Fund free education for the Class of 2020 and beyond, that's smart investing. Not tossing cash at every man, woman, and child.

stopbush

(24,396 posts)
123. The Ds who are proposing this are truly visionaries. They are looking at our
Sun May 10, 2020, 10:33 AM
May 2020

near-term economic future and seeing that things are going to get WORSE, very much worse, before things get even a little bit better. They are getting ahead of the inevitable continuing disaster and offering a solution that - if implemented quickly - will mitigate the new hardships we are sure to endure as early as this Fall.

RussBLib

(9,036 posts)
135. These are extraordinary times
Sun May 10, 2020, 06:23 PM
May 2020

Calling for extraordinary measures. As long as government is keeping people away from their jobs, some replacement income should be required. Those who are still well-employed don't need it and should not get it. I can imagine a computer system that could easily issue money to those who really need it, and those who do not. But then again, this is the Trump era.

Calculating

(2,957 posts)
136. The people who are still working will never go for it then
Sun May 10, 2020, 06:45 PM
May 2020

They'll rightfully say "why should people get money for nothing while I still need to work?"

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sorry, but this "$2,000/m...