DiceHands

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,655
$500 per family is not enough right now, even if it's recurring. It's also not a guaranteed $500, it's UP TO $500. If your household is small, you're not likely to receive that amount.

$1000 per adult means most households would receive at least $2000 right away.

Harris' plan is fine long-term, but it's not enough right now.

Agreed. Im a huge fan of UBI and think it needs to be done before we are all fucked. Technology will take over a lot of jobs. Hell, companies are sending work to places like India constantly for cheaper labor. What happens with AI can do that same job faster, more effeciently, and for free? We are all gonna be fucked.

We will need UBI in the future. If this is what causes it to become more mainstream, then so be it. But 500 dollars a household isnt going to get it done.
 

collige

Member
Oct 31, 2017
12,772
I agree $500/mo isn't anything useful for many people. Better than nothing I guess - but still. But Romney's proposal was a one-time $1000. Not per month.
Yeah, but we're in a crisis. People don't have the luxury of thinking "per month" right now when they got bills to pay and no job. Romney's proposal is actually appropriate for what's happening. If the best idea Kamala has for this is hyping a two year old bill, it's embarrassing.
 
Last edited:

HipsterMorty

alt account
Banned
Jan 25, 2020
901
Honestly I would rather see money only going to people who are unemployed. I feel like it would be kind of wasteful to give everyone $1,000. There are lots of well off knowledge workers who will be able to WFH for the foreseeable future. Depending on where you live $1,000 a month could be a drop in the bucket. For now I'm good and having an extra $1,000 wouldn't really improve my life at all or make me feel more secure, I'd probably just invest it in stocks and ordering takeout to support local business. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient if we gave those who were unemployed and stay at home parents, say $3,000 a month or something like that.

Normally I'm against means testing, but I think this could be a rare case where it's helpful. If we're going to be in this situation for another year or more until we get a vaccine we've got to be thinking long term.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,801
Fuck the US airlines. Of course I feel bad for their workers but I'll be happy if they go out of business. They don't give a fuck about anyone but their executives.

I'm hoping that businesses that need meetings (those that travel) can do it via the Internet.
 

Deleted member 3017

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
17,653
Honestly I would rather see money only going to people who are unemployed. I feel like it would be kind of wasteful to give everyone $1,000. There are lots of well off knowledge workers who will be able to WFH for the foreseeable future. Depending on where you live $1,000 a month could be a drop in the bucket. For now I'm good and having an extra $1,000 wouldn't really improve my life at all or make me feel more secure, I'd probably just invest it in stocks and ordering takeout to support local business. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient if we gave those who were unemployed and stay at home parents, say $3,000 a month or something like that.

Normally I'm against means testing, but I think this could be a rare case where it's helpful. If we're going to be in this situation for another year or more until we get a vaccine we've got to be thinking long term.
It's actually easier and more efficient to just give the money to everyone. Restricting it to umemployed citizens means it's going to take a lot longer for people to receive the cash, as you'd need a system in place to screen for that.
 

Deleted member 31923

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 8, 2017
5,826
They are printing money left and right between this and the Fed that it's surprising they would only do $500. Trump is really trying to buy reelection. But of course, he misses the point and isn't doing anything about the people laid off or unable to work right now, like restaurant workers. And I look forward to Republicans decrying this as socialism because their heads would explode if Obama proposed this.
 

Dusktildawn48

Chicken Chaser
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,533
St. Louis
Honestly I would rather see money only going to people who are unemployed. I feel like it would be kind of wasteful to give everyone $1,000. There are lots of well off knowledge workers who will be able to WFH for the foreseeable future. Depending on where you live $1,000 a month could be a drop in the bucket. For now I'm good and having an extra $1,000 wouldn't really improve my life at all or make me feel more secure, I'd probably just invest it in stocks and ordering takeout to support local business. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient if we gave those who were unemployed and stay at home parents, say $3,000 a month or something like that.

Normally I'm against means testing, but I think this could be a rare case where it's helpful. If we're going to be in this situation for another year or more until we get a vaccine we've got to be thinking long term.
My wife and I are employed and struggling hard. We both rely on tips which are few and far between right now. So we need this real bad right now.
 

Version 3.0

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,513
A payroll tax cut is honestly "evil genius" level of fuckery. It's literally the answer to the question "how can we give aid, but make 100% sure the people who need it most don't receive any?"
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,561
Honestly I would rather see money only going to people who are unemployed. I feel like it would be kind of wasteful to give everyone $1,000. There are lots of well off knowledge workers who will be able to WFH for the foreseeable future. Depending on where you live $1,000 a month could be a drop in the bucket. For now I'm good and having an extra $1,000 wouldn't really improve my life at all or make me feel more secure, I'd probably just invest it in stocks and ordering takeout to support local business. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient if we gave those who were unemployed and stay at home parents, say $3,000 a month or something like that.

Normally I'm against means testing, but I think this could be a rare case where it's helpful. If we're going to be in this situation for another year or more until we get a vaccine we've got to be thinking long term.

And so you'd throw minimum wage clerks in the work force to the wolves.

They need extra money too
 

Barzul

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,965
Honestly I would rather see money only going to people who are unemployed. I feel like it would be kind of wasteful to give everyone $1,000. There are lots of well off knowledge workers who will be able to WFH for the foreseeable future. Depending on where you live $1,000 a month could be a drop in the bucket. For now I'm good and having an extra $1,000 wouldn't really improve my life at all or make me feel more secure, I'd probably just invest it in stocks and ordering takeout to support local business. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient if we gave those who were unemployed and stay at home parents, say $3,000 a month or something like that.

Normally I'm against means testing, but I think this could be a rare case where it's helpful. If we're going to be in this situation for another year or more until we get a vaccine we've got to be thinking long term.
The problem is they're trying to increase demand. We're experiencing a incredible drop in demand which is killing the economy. Everyone is only spending on essentials, give people money that they didn't have and they'll spend it on random shit boosting the economy overall. That's the logic anyways.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
The problem is they're trying to increase demand. We're experiencing a incredible drop in demand which is killing the economy. Everyone is only spending on essentials, give people money that they didn't have and they'll spend it on random shit boosting the economy overall. That's the logic anyways.
This is also a massive production shock as well. It's all sides of it.
 

meowdi gras

Banned
Feb 24, 2018
12,679
I'm not arguing we SHOULD cut it. But let's be clear. If we just send money to people instead of doing payroll tax (which I support), we will be in a larger deficit and SS/Medicare will be on the chopping block in the future. Either way, it's gonna be at risk.
Republicans have held up any and every excuse they can for cutting SS and Medicare for ages. So there's no way of stopping that, one way or the other. But at least with a check, you see maximum benefits to individual citizens vs the more corporate-friendly payroll tax cut. And besides the fact that it's harder for the average American to understand how the payroll tax cut effectively cuts off direct SS/Medicare funding at its source, rendering it an easier public sell for Republicans to justify cutting of entitlements.
 

TwntyOneTwlv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,626
Ohio
$500 isn't nothing. It would cover groceries for my wife and I for a month, but then again, we don't have any kids. For most families, $500 seems like it wouldn't do much at all.
 

m_shortpants

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,571
If I recall correctly from my studies in Economics (in which I have a bachelors, lol), typical fiscal policy to counter a recession involves increases taxes and increases government spending. So looks like we'll get the latter, but good look with the former under a GOP government.
 

maxxpower

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,950
California
Why not just keep funding the unemployment insurance pot. If I get unemployment I could probably get up to $3,000 a month.
 

Schlorgan

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,932
Salt Lake City, Utah
How is this to the right of Romney? This is $500/mo, the Romney plan (which didn't start with Romney and has been circulating for a few weeks) is a 1-time $1000

I do agree that $500 is a joke (so is $1000 fwiw)
Romney plan is $1k per adult, which for a two adult household is the same as Harris's plan ($500/month per household) for 4 months and you get it all right now.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
If I recall correctly from my studies in Economics (in which I have a bachelors, lol), typical fiscal policy to counter a recession involves increases taxes and increases government spending. So looks like we'll get the latter, but good look with the former under a GOP government.
You absolutely don't want to be increasing taxes in a recession. You want loosened monetary policy and increased spending. The former is being done by the fed.
 

boxter432

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
9,558
Maybe I am not comprehending it correctly, but Kamala isn't saying this is the strategt for COVID, but her long term LIFT act strategy of $500/mo for working families as a UBI type system. I mean she brought it up years ago right?
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Maybe I am not comprehending it correctly, but Kamala isn't saying this is the strategt for COVID, but her long term LIFT act strategy of $500/mo for working families as a UBI type system. I mean she brought it up years ago right?
Correct, the issue is that her senate social media team is really bad and shouldn't be bringing it up without that context.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
Romney plan is $1k per adult, which for a two adult household is the same as Harris's plan ($500/month per household) for 4 months and you get it all right now.

Kamala's plan, the LIFT act, is a permanent UBI, so 4 months is insignificant. What does the math look like after 10 years?

and again, I am not pushing her plan, I am just saying it isn't to the right of Romneys (which isn't Romneys)

e: this is, of course, an oversimplification of her plan which you can read more analysis of here: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2018/10/19/17995374/kamala-harris-lift-act-basic-income-cash-eitc
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Yep, same thing with bailing out the airlines while ignoring that almost the entire economy is shutting down right now.
The entire hospitality and transportation industries (things like local metrorails) are going to be in need of massive amounts of help. Airlines are part of that but it needs to be a total package aimed at everything.
 

lucas_hood

Member
Mar 20, 2018
993
so This is 500 a month for every adult or 1000 once for one adult or what? I'm employed and I'm doing ok but I'll take 500 or 1000 bucks obviously.