- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question about why people are against stimulus benefits?
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:41 am
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:41 am
Look I default to the side of the government shouldn’t interfere, they shouldn’t tell us what to do, give us stuff, take something away etc.... UNLESS they have an incredibly good reason to do so that involves our safety and/or unarguable benefit to public wellness.
I look at this weekly stimulus for the currently unemployed as a necessity for many who lost jobs or are temporarily without work due to this pandemic/shutdown. I can get behind the idea that nobody should be getting paid more than 100% of what their salary is, but that’s so hard to figure out for hourly workers who’s wages change all the time, and taking last years tax returns doesn’t really work IMO because some people’s income can change drastically year to year.
So what is the argument against the stimulus? There are 100’s of thousands that are out of work at no fault of their own, not giving them a stimulus seems to be a great way to collapse the economy IMO.
This is not a thread arguing about whether or not the economy should be shut down, that’s a totally different discussion, this is about the idea that if the economy remains shutdown, people who can’t work because of that need the temporary stimulus in order to keep the economy running, and trying to give everyone a different amount based on income or projected income would be extremely difficult for the federal government to do. State unemployment already does that btw, so not all these people are getting the max (which I know in TX would be $550 in addition to the $600, but most wont get that much).
I look at this weekly stimulus for the currently unemployed as a necessity for many who lost jobs or are temporarily without work due to this pandemic/shutdown. I can get behind the idea that nobody should be getting paid more than 100% of what their salary is, but that’s so hard to figure out for hourly workers who’s wages change all the time, and taking last years tax returns doesn’t really work IMO because some people’s income can change drastically year to year.
So what is the argument against the stimulus? There are 100’s of thousands that are out of work at no fault of their own, not giving them a stimulus seems to be a great way to collapse the economy IMO.
This is not a thread arguing about whether or not the economy should be shut down, that’s a totally different discussion, this is about the idea that if the economy remains shutdown, people who can’t work because of that need the temporary stimulus in order to keep the economy running, and trying to give everyone a different amount based on income or projected income would be extremely difficult for the federal government to do. State unemployment already does that btw, so not all these people are getting the max (which I know in TX would be $550 in addition to the $600, but most wont get that much).
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:42 am to Tiger1242
look at size of national debt.... eventually it has a tipping point....
EDIT:
and how many are out of work by choice? and how many governors/mayors would open things back up if pressure of out of work voters hit home...
without the federal $600 added in, peeps in Louisiana would get up to $250ish/week with the fed money they get $850/wk that's $21.50/hr or $44,300/year. how many making $50/k or more would settle for unemployment and not haveing to work.....
throw in two working member in a household and both taking unemployment are getting $1700/wk to site home.....
Why work, when you can stay home.....
EDIT:
and how many are out of work by choice? and how many governors/mayors would open things back up if pressure of out of work voters hit home...
without the federal $600 added in, peeps in Louisiana would get up to $250ish/week with the fed money they get $850/wk that's $21.50/hr or $44,300/year. how many making $50/k or more would settle for unemployment and not haveing to work.....
throw in two working member in a household and both taking unemployment are getting $1700/wk to site home.....
Why work, when you can stay home.....
This post was edited on 7/23/20 at 8:52 am
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:44 am to Tiger1242
These 'benefits' are essentially just printing more money. Unfortunately, the economy is sputtering, yes, but the answer is not to lower the value of the dollar and add to the national debt. Free money is not the answer in the long run, just a bandaid that will be very costly.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:44 am to Tiger1242
I'm against anything that encourages people to not go back to work.
This is 100% A MAJOR problem right now in restaurants and bars. You're paying unskilled labor the equivalent of a 4 year degree's worth of salary to NOT work.
The state governments only allowing 50% occupancy is killing owners and servers. They have no incentive to go back to work as long as they're making 52k a year to sit at home.
As far as actual stimulus checks, they're bullshite unless every single tax paying citizen gets one. period.
This is 100% A MAJOR problem right now in restaurants and bars. You're paying unskilled labor the equivalent of a 4 year degree's worth of salary to NOT work.
The state governments only allowing 50% occupancy is killing owners and servers. They have no incentive to go back to work as long as they're making 52k a year to sit at home.
As far as actual stimulus checks, they're bullshite unless every single tax paying citizen gets one. period.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:45 am to Tiger1242
$600 a week plus $250 from state unemployment is a great incentive to sit at home and not return to work. And it has nothing to do with “compassion” for the unemployed. It’s a tactic to keep the unemployment numbers spiked so they can blame it on Trump leading up to the election.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:45 am to Tiger1242
Its technically our money, but then we will have to pay with our money. Why do people need an extra $1200? Why is it only $1200?
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:46 am to Tiger1242
quote:
So what is the argument against the stimulus?
1. It provided more $$ than people were getting working. Which, was/is retarded.
2. MOST IMPORTANTLY, it's being done to make people OK with the shut down.
quote:
So what is the argument against the stimulus?
Since you repeated I'll add
1. We shouldn't be shut down
2. The stimulus is nothing more than a device to prolong the shut down.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:46 am to Tiger1242
I'm against it personally because we are a fiscally very irresponsible country when it comes to money - probably b/c we have too much of it.
With the taxes we pay every year on everything, I'm inclined to go along with it, but it does create a de facto nanny state and I'm not down with that.
With that said, I feel sorry for the food service industry workers. They're getting a raw deal with these shutdowns.
With the taxes we pay every year on everything, I'm inclined to go along with it, but it does create a de facto nanny state and I'm not down with that.
With that said, I feel sorry for the food service industry workers. They're getting a raw deal with these shutdowns.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:47 am to Tiger1242
It costs a shite ton.
If people weren’t getting borrowed taxpayer money they would be clamoring to end these bull shite lockdowns and get back to work.
If people weren’t getting borrowed taxpayer money they would be clamoring to end these bull shite lockdowns and get back to work.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:47 am to Tiger1242
I will add a more general reality.
When attempting to solve a problem...………..ANY problem...……….your solutions have to be sustainable. And, if the problem is a problem that could reasonably be foreseen as repeating itself, your solutions must be BOTH sustainable AND repeatable.
NOTHING about what we are doing in response to this virus meets EITHER of those criteria.
When attempting to solve a problem...………..ANY problem...……….your solutions have to be sustainable. And, if the problem is a problem that could reasonably be foreseen as repeating itself, your solutions must be BOTH sustainable AND repeatable.
NOTHING about what we are doing in response to this virus meets EITHER of those criteria.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:48 am to Tiger1242
The checks to tax payers isn't the issue. It's the PPP loans and the monetary stimulus. It's the reason tLibs bitch about monopolies, wealth concentration and large corporations. All you get is more concentration, less competition and more regulation. It's a fun positive feedback loop when you combine that with 0% rates.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:48 am to YumYum Sauce
quote:
I'm against anything that encourages people to not go back to work.
This is 100% A MAJOR problem right now in restaurants and bars. You're paying unskilled labor the equivalent of a 4 year degree's worth of salary to NOT work.
This right here. If we keep doing this it becomes tougher to take away. Like welfare in general
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:49 am to Tiger1242
These spending bills only have short-term unpredictable effects on elections, but they have long-term detrimental effects on the middle class.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:49 am to Tiger1242
What is there to even stimulate? Bars are closed, movie theaters are closed, nearly every restaurant is takeout only, domestic travel (air or not) is way down, amusement parks are at a tiny fraction of capacity etc etc. At this point it's like the little Dutch boy with his fingers in the dam. You're just giving money to people that will either save it or use it to pay for basic necessities and not put it back into the local economy. We have to get back to work.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:50 am to tigeraddict
quote:
eventually it has a tipping point
I am beginning to think that is no longer true under the current monetary scheme. We said this in regards to TARP and the subsequent QE's.....we got stock market surges. We just had a huge welfare transfer......stock market surges. The stock market ostensibly is sensitive to this metric, but in reality it is decoupled from it because it sees this debt issue as an illusion...at worst. Think about it, after TARP and all the QE'S the Velocity of Money theory should have been proven. It never reared its disfigured head.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:50 am to tigeraddict
These are all good replies, I understand we have a national debt that is growing and I understand that there are many that may feel incentivized to stay home and not work because of the stimulus.
I totally agree that this is a band-aid but sometimes band-aids are what you need. These people choosing not to work will not be able to forever, it’s a temporary stimulus and IMO until economies are able to reopen it is a solid way to keep people afloat while they can’t work do to the shutdown.
I know it’s not a perfect plan but it’s better than letting these people collapse into debt, which may permanently damage the economy beyond what is already being done
I totally agree that this is a band-aid but sometimes band-aids are what you need. These people choosing not to work will not be able to forever, it’s a temporary stimulus and IMO until economies are able to reopen it is a solid way to keep people afloat while they can’t work do to the shutdown.
I know it’s not a perfect plan but it’s better than letting these people collapse into debt, which may permanently damage the economy beyond what is already being done
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:50 am to Tiger1242
I’ve talked to several restaurant owners here in BR. To a person they have had problems getting some workers back because of the amount. $600 may be necessary in NY but not BR.
The question is not do people need help, but how to taylor that help in a positive way. Keep people paying bills while looking for any work, not just their chosen profession at the moment. People need to make an effort not just sit back and let the Government bring it to them.
The question is not do people need help, but how to taylor that help in a positive way. Keep people paying bills while looking for any work, not just their chosen profession at the moment. People need to make an effort not just sit back and let the Government bring it to them.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:51 am to ShortyRob
There will be another stimulus, simply because politicians want to be re-elected in a few months. The stimulus plans will disappear after November because they are bad monetary policy.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:51 am to Tiger1242
All is being paid with borrowed money. The broke helping the broke is a recipe for disaster.
Posted on 7/23/20 at 8:52 am to Tiger1242
The more stimulus means the longer the country stays shut down
A 1200.00 check isn’t going to help me if I lose my business
I am making bottom dollar trying to get a small business established
I know I’m lucky I’m still getting anything, so many peoples lives have been destroyed & a stimulus isn’t going to bring their business back
A 1200.00 check isn’t going to help me if I lose my business
I am making bottom dollar trying to get a small business established
I know I’m lucky I’m still getting anything, so many peoples lives have been destroyed & a stimulus isn’t going to bring their business back
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News