Positives from Covid-19

[93henfan]

None of us on here will be receiving anything.....thank god we all earn more than 75/150K!

I should be getting a check. There are a few of us regular working folk on here

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had the time, this could have been done a lot better.

[GannonFan]

I should be getting a check. There are a few of us regular working folk on here

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had the time, this could have been done a lot better.

I agree with that. I'm still working, my wife as a teacher (even on sabbatical) is still getting paid, and we'll just sneak into getting a check and, with 3 kids to boot, will get even more money. I'll take the money, but we haven't been financially impacted by this yet whereas I know plenty of people, especially those in the trades or work independently, who have lost their entire incomes. We rushed this when it really should've been a more tailored bill to specifically make sure that people who lost their incomes still have their incomes. I think to a point the bill has done that, but in typical political fashion, it was done sloppily and will end up costing a lot more money than it should've and still miss too many people that it's supposed to be helping.

[Silenoz]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... alculator/

I used this. Seems we'll get money (because of the three kids) even if we probably shouldn't. So it goes.

[Ibanez]

I didn't realize going out on a limb was a prerequisite to provide a comment on the team I watch. Yes, I said we had to see more of him, considering that Danny had done a good job of not playing him at all. Methinks you're just miffed on the fans from Delaware tact I used more than anything else. I didn't think I was referring to you, but I certainly may have struck a nerve.

No, no nerves were struck on my side at all. I was posting in September that we needed to be playing Henderson and you were refuting it, and of course you were wrong. Sorry I struck a nerve with you.

Are you two power bottoms finished?

[GannonFan]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... alculator/

I used this. Seems we'll get money (because of the three kids) even if we probably shouldn't. So it goes.

Yup, them not pro-rating for the kids is the real kicker. But then again, kids do cost a lot of money and my 3 boys are in the prime of their eat everything phase, so I'll take it.

[dbackjon]

I should be getting a check. There are a few of us regular working folk on here

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had the time, this could have been done a lot better.

So what happens to the person who gets laid off a week after the checks go out? They get double screwed?

Just think of this as a down payment on all the extra taxes Alex and I paid before we were able to get legally married.

[dbackjon]

I will be using a good portion of the money to support local businesses. If you feel guilty about getting money, feel free to do the same

[93henfan]

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had the time, this could have been done a lot better.

So what happens to the person who gets laid off a week after the checks go out? They get double screwed?

Just think of this as a down payment on all the extra taxes Alex and I paid before we were able to get legally married.

Thanks for validating my point. That's why we need better means testing. There will undoubtedly be additional rounds of stimulus.

And while you're boo hooing, let me throw in: I'm single. I pay child support for which I get no tax deduction, and my ex happily takes the money and doesn't have to claim it as income. She will be getting a check and I will not.

Luckily, I work hard, got a great education including a masters, sacrificed for several years serving the country in the military, and worked my way up in the civilian world to make a great salary. I had the same freedom everyone else had to create my own situation. I live comfortably and thankfully don't need the check.

And I still maintain it's really stupid to give checks to people who kept their jobs through this. They should double up on the amounts to people who actually need it.

[89Hen]

I should be getting a check. There are a few of us regular working folk on here

Who let the riff raff in?

[dbackjon]

So what happens to the person who gets laid off a week after the checks go out? They get double screwed?

Just think of this as a down payment on all the extra taxes Alex and I paid before we were able to get legally married.

Thanks for validating my point. That's why we need better means testing. There will undoubtedly be additional rounds of stimulus.

Congress has been bailing out the wealthy and corporations for decades. Not going to sweat some middle-class people getting undeserved money

Say 5 million people get "undeserved" money - that's the same cost of 300 miles of Trump's vanity Wall.

[93henfan]

Thanks for validating my point. That's why we need better means testing. There will undoubtedly be additional rounds of stimulus.

Congress has been bailing out the wealthy and corporations for decades. Not going to sweat some middle-class people getting undeserved money

Say 5 million people get "undeserved" money - that's the same cost of 300 miles of Trump's vanity Wall.

Way to deflect.

I would prefer to get the money to low and middle class people who need it.

[BDKJMU]

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had the time, this could have been done a lot better.

So what happens to the person who gets laid off a week after the checks go out? They get double screwed?

Just think of this as a down payment on all the extra taxes Alex and I paid before we were able to get legally married.

No. If you get laid off (includes independent/self employe/gig workers as I understand it) you get your weekly state unemployment + a weekly $600 supplemental on top of that for up to 4 months. Talked about this in the bailout thread. Those making a little more than your state's median income and below can get more $$ for being laid off.

[BDKJMU]

So as I'm reading it, only those childless individuals making above 99k/couples 198k would get nothing. No cap on the $500 per child.

Direct payments to individuals
The bill would provide a one-time payment of $1,200 to every adult with income of up to $75,000 ($150,000 for married couples). After those thresholds, the payments would decrease, and go to zero for individuals making more than $99,000. Families would receive $500 per child.

So a family of four making less than $150,000 could receive $3,400.

Increased unemployment aid
Unemployment benefits would increase by $600 per week (up to 4 months) on top of the benefits each state already provides.

The measure also includes an additional 13 weeks of unemployment benefits for those who exhaust their state benefits.

Lots of democrat and union comments praising the unemployment.
https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronav ... 00325.html

[dbackjon]

And the unemployment benefits pale in comparison to what Jared and other developers will likely get...

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/27/investin ... index.html


The $2 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill passed by the Senate provides aid for average consumers and small businesses -- but there's also a lucrative tax break for wealthy real estate developers.

That's because the stimulus bill removes limits on the amount of losses that wealthy investors can use to offset taxes, by writing down the gradual depreciation of assets like real estate. Those limits were put into place as part of President Trump's 2017 tax reform bill.
The New York Times was the first to report this nuance in the stimulus bill, which can be found in a brief section on page 203 of the 880-page document. The Times also cited a draft congressional analysis that said this part of the stimulus bill would lead to $170 billion in tax breaks over ten years.
Originally, the 2017 tax bill let wealthy investors use depreciation to offset the first $500,000 of capital gains from investments each year.

[houndawg]

You gonna take that socialist hand out?

None of us on here will be receiving anything.....thank god we all earn more than 75/150K!

I heard anybody drawing SS gets some chump change?

[UNI88]

I should be getting a check. There are a few of us regular working folk on here

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job/hours or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had taken the time, this could have been done a lot better.

FYP - I completely agree. I'll probably get a check (it's a little murky because of the divorce) but I'm working and don't need it as much as someone who isn't working or is working fewer hours.

This rush to fix things immediately is what led to Obama throwing millions at "shovel ready" projects which ended up being workers throwing asphalt in potholes rather than working on infrastructure improvements that would have had a significantly longer lasting impact. It did butter the bread of his union supporters just like this bailout butters the bread of a lot of different people.

We're going to end up regretting rushing into this rather than taking a little more time to make this help the people who need it most.

[BDKJMU]

The checks should only be going to people who lost income because of the crisis. Those who didn't lose their job/hours or who didn't work when this started shouldn't be getting checks.

In addition, having the crude means testing of 75/150K is also the lazy way out. There are some people making greater than that who lost work who have big bills that, if gone unpaid, will have larger ramifications to the economy than a person making $50K last year whose bills go unpaid.

I get it that more detailed means testing could be labor intensive and that the goal is to get money out quickly, but if we had taken the time, this could have been done a lot better.

FYP - I completely agree. I'll probably get a check (it's a little murky because of the divorce) but I'm working and don't need it as much as someone who isn't working or is working fewer hours.

This rush to fix things immediately is what led to Obama throwing millions at "shovel ready" projects which ended up being workers throwing asphalt in potholes rather than working on infrastructure improvements that would have had a significantly longer lasting impact. It did butter the bread of his union supporters just like this bailout butters the bread of a lot of different people.

We're going to end up regretting rushing into this rather than taking a little more time to make this help the people who need it most.

Yep. Just printing 2.2 trillion (which could rise to 6.2 trillion, which means it probably will) pumping it into an economy with 1.3 trillion discretionary annual spending, is going to lead to in the future: "Remember back when we only had 2% inflation?"..

[SDHornet]

FYP - I completely agree. I'll probably get a check (it's a little murky because of the divorce) but I'm working and don't need it as much as someone who isn't working or is working fewer hours.

This rush to fix things immediately is what led to Obama throwing millions at "shovel ready" projects which ended up being workers throwing asphalt in potholes rather than working on infrastructure improvements that would have had a significantly longer lasting impact. It did butter the bread of his union supporters just like this bailout butters the bread of a lot of different people.

We're going to end up regretting rushing into this rather than taking a little more time to make this help the people who need it most.

Yep. Just printing 2.2 trillion (which could rise to 6.2 trillion, which means it probably will) pumping it into an economy with 1.3 trillion discretionary annual spending, is going to lead to in the future: "Remember back when we only had 2% inflation?"..

[AZGrizFan]

The “checks” are just a massive case of wealth redistribution.

[dbackjon]

The “checks” are just a massive case of wealth redistribution.

As usual, mostly upwards.

[AZGrizFan]

The “checks” are just a massive case of wealth redistribution.

As usual, mostly upwards.

Not to any W-2 earner between $75,000-$Infinity

[89Hen]

My dog is a creature of habit. She now starts to nose me at 3:30pm for her mile walk. That's a good thing for both of us.

[dbackjon]

As usual, mostly upwards.

Not to any W-2 earner between $75,000-$Infinity

They got theirs the last 50 years of voodoo economics, magnified by the TrumpTaxScam

[BDKJMU]

As usual, mostly upwards.

Not to any W-2 earner between $75,000-$Infinity

I thought it started phasing down at 75k AGI? Isn't it 99k AGI -Infinity that will be getting nada?

[BDKJMU]

I will be using a good portion of the money to support local businesses. If you feel guilty about getting money, feel free to do the same

You mean you won't be returning your Trump check?