they are still messing with the $1400 check.

[drray23]

Just heard on MSNBC that the numbers had changed the past few hours. This was by a member of congress being interviewed. No more details that I could gather.

[mr_lebowski]

1. I'm presuming it's the cut-offs and sliding scale numbers still being discussed (nt)

[WarGamer]

2. While I won't be receiving a dime...

I'm annoyed by the amount.

The 600 is long gone for the people who received it.

And it needs to be graduated.

Under $30k/yr income, $3000... $30-50k, $2000... and $50k-75k, $1000... $75k+, nada

[drray23]

3. it should be what it was the first two rounds.

first, its easier to get out the door quickly and second we do not want to be in a situation where people who previously got it are cutoff. It would be a huge blowback for democrats.

Biden would be accused of having broken his promise and other candidates like warnock could lose next cycle. Tightening the rules is political suicide.

[WarGamer]

5. Think about it.

The families who need it MOST should receive the MOST, right?

You can keep the same expenditure and graduate the pmt's but help those in need more.

I live in a nice area... you know what I saw last year after the first 1200 pmt?

On trash day, a dozen 75" LED TV boxes stuffed in the garbage cans... just on my way out of the subdivision.

[drray23]

6. they can increase it for lower income families

but they should not tighten it. its already on a sliding scale. Besides people pumping the money in the economy is good.

[WarGamer]

8. That would require exceeding the 1.9T number

And even DEMS in the Senate will flinch

Cut back at the top, more to the bottom... keeps budget intact.

[drray23]

10. and lose next elections

and get gop back in power where nothing good will get done.

[Autumn]

9. Proof that a dozen people used their stimulus as it was meant for. Stimulating the economy

[WarGamer]

11. Yes and No.

I'd rather have Family #1 using that money to buy food, new shoes, clothing, keep their car insured and take the kids to get braces than Family #2, married couple making combined $120k a year buying a TV or heading off to Cabo... or investing in GME.

[drray23]

12. why ?

one does not preclude the other. Those stores who sell goods also employ low income people. Putting money in the economy has a multiplier effect.

[WarGamer]

15. the effect on the economy is the same as long as it gets spent.

But if you have a fixed budget, it's only logical and progressive to help those in need MORE.

[Autumn]

14. The stimulus being means tested at such a low wage is pathetic .What you and the Republicans want

is stupid. I'm just gonna say bullshit and move right on.

[WarGamer]

16. wow...

Show me a Republican promoting higher payments to the poor while phasing out the top end.

[Autumn]

17. There isn't a Republican promoting higher payments to the poor, that's not what means testing does.

The stimulus is not fucking welfare. It's a stimulus to stimulate the economy. It's keeping a promise from the President who campaigned on it. A combined income of 150 thousand from 2 earners might be a lot in WV but not in other places.

If Republicans want to save money they can raise taxes on the wealthy and coeporations. Republican talking points are just bullshit and I hate to see them spread around.

[WarGamer]

18. Let me repeat.

It DOES NOT matter who spends it, as long as it's spent it goes into the economy.

Let's make it really clear.

If you have a FINITE amount of cash.

And a large number of potential recipients

Let's say a zillion dollars. That zillion will make it DIRECTLY into the economy very quickly (unless you give it to the rich who will just buy another 10 shares of AAPL)

So the next question is, how do distribute the zillion to make the most impact onpeople's lives?

Clearly... you help those at the bottom FIRST and MORE.

Can't believe I have to explain this on a Progressive board...

[Autumn]

19. Are you aware that it's based on 2019 tax returns? A family making 150 thousand in 2019

may have lost their jobs during the pandemic in 2020. One or both wagers may not be able to make now what they made then. Business closed people, spouses died, people lost income. Shit happened to a lot of people in this pandemic and it will fucking take years for people to recover

I can't believe that I am seeing Republican talking points on a progressive board or that I'm having to explain what harm the Republican want will do...

[WarGamer]

20. Here's what I can assure you...

People who made under 30k need the help the most.

And they will use 2020 numbers if you've filed 2020 taxes.

[Autumn]

23. I can assure you I don't need your arssurance so you can

save them. I'm a Democrat, I'm intelligent enough to know how things work. Like I said 30 thousand might be a lot to people in placed like WV or other red state poverty areas but it's not shit in most places.

[drray23]

21. I did not say it in my reply but this did make me think

of the Reagan trope about Cadillac moms or the Bush nonsense about poor people getting cellphones. How do they dare spend their money on cellphones (or tvs as the poster says) when they should buy food instead ?

[Autumn]

24. It's Republican talking points that go all the way back to that mother fucker Reagan.

It's really getting a work out now.

[Maru Kitteh]

26. I don't get people who feel entitled to moralize about how

ordinary people spend money. Are you under the impression that average citizens are receiving too much in the way of service and amenities from their government?

This is literally the least our government could do for the people of this country in this situation. It's actually pretty damn pathetic. Wagging one's finger at the neighbors over their use of economic stimulus is counterproductive and seriously misguided, imo.

[gldstwmn]

22. The point was for people to put that money back

into the economy so if people bought televisions then I'm good with that.

[Takket]

13. exactly this.........

the promise was everyone who only got $600 would get $1400 more if they put the Democrats in charge of the Senate.

I'm not going to argue that some people need that more than others, we know that, but that isn't the point. Democrats made a promise on this and will get ROASTED if they welsh on it.

future relief packages later on can have more strict means testing if needed.

[Bradshaw3]

25. Great idea!

I wonder if it was an option at one time.

[MacKasey]

4. It needs to stay the same rules as with the $600

The Dems promised the $2000, need to keep that promise!

[WarGamer]

7. It pisses me off to NO END

that the Congress spends BILLIONS on a new Navy Ship or unnecessary fighter aircraft but finger wags about helping Americans during a Global pandemic.