Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Rips GOP Lawmaker's Anti-Stimulus Stance In Fiery Tweet

[riversedge]

Source: huff post



12/29/2020 07:27 pm ET

Texas Rep. Kevin Brady said he opposed the measure in part because of how people would spend the money.


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) fired back on Monday at colleagues who opposed increasing direct stimulus payments to Americans for coronavirus relief.

The House passed legislation Monday to increase stimulus checks to $2,000 for most Americans. Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) said he opposed the increased amount because it would go toward people paying down credit card debt or making “new purchases online at Walmart, Best Buy or Amazon.”

Ocasio-Cortez, who has long advocated for higher direct payments, mocked the Republican’s take, pointing to Congress’ monthslong delay in providing desperately needed pandemic aid.............................

Read more: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-kevin-brady-stimulus_n_5febadf3c5b6ff747984d101?section=politics&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016

---

Brady is such a little creepy man.

Link to tweet

?s=20

Link to tweet

?s=20

Link to tweet

?s=20

[LaMouffette]

1. Republicans weren't concerned about how corporations would spend their money when giant tax cuts

were enacted in 2017. Republicans passed the deficit-exploding tax cuts with gay abandon, all the while reassuring Americans that the money would be used to increase wages and create more jobs. Instead, the corporations used much of the money on stock buy backs.

The Buyback Binge

Cheerleaders for the tax cut argued that the heart of the law — cutting and restructuring taxes for corporations — would give the economy a positive bump, giving companies incentives to invest more, hire more workers and pay higher wages.

Skeptics said that the money companies saved through tax cuts would merely increase corporate profits, rather than trickling down to workers.

JPMorgan Chase analysts estimate that in the first half of 2018, about $270 billion in corporate profits previously held overseas were repatriated to the United States and spent as a result of changes to the tax code. Some 46 percent of that, JPMorgan Chase analysts said, was spent on $124 billion in stock buybacks.

[link:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/business/economy/trumps-tax-cut-was-supposed-to-change-corporate-behavior-heres-what-happened.html|

Yet another example of Republican hypocrisy and privilege: "We wealthy people get to spend our free government money any way we choose, but you poor people are too irresponsible to be trusted to spend your money the way it really should be spent."

[Grins]

3. Reminds me of Sen. Grassley in 2017

Arguing the investor class was better because those “other” people would “...just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze, or women, or movies.”

[Beartracks]

4. "because of how people would spend the money" -- How did Republicans...

... convince themselves that "how" the money is spent, or what it's spent on, makes a shit's bit of difference?

If someone REALLY spends their relief money or their EBT dollars or whatever on crab legs and beer, so what? The economy needs the money to be moving -- not locked up in an offshore account -- and if next month that family realizes they should've spread the money farther by buying oatmeal and milk, that's what they will do. Any value that might be gained from micro-managing and over-administering these sorts of programs is not justified by the overwhelming economic value realized by shifting that overhead into the pockets of the recipients instead.

=============