Update - 3/11/21 - America Rescue Plan Bill is signed!

[TK]

2 hours ago, Jumbo said:

wow---that's some big stuffs and the details on how that could possibly work long term will be veddy veddy inter-esting

That'd be a minimum of 14 grand. Think about this. If you just let it sit on that card & don't use it, you could have a down payment on a house for a first time home buyer. 

[Jumbo]

25 minutes ago, TK said:

That'd be a minimum of 14 grand. Think about this. If you just let it sit on that card & don't use it, you could have a down payment on a house for a first time home buyer. 

 

 

i'm seeng an endless line of dinty moore cans and 40oz bottles

 

thanskgiving every day

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

While I’d love to purchase a new side x side courtesy of the feds, there is not a chance in the world that happens.

[Jumbo]

 

 

[spjunkies]

I'd settle for the chicks for free. 

[Llevron]

If that happens added to our savings that’s easy a down payment in a house me and the fiancé can pay for with just one my paychecks alone WITH room for us to grow into if we decide to go that route. 

madness. Count me as super super skeptical 

[The Evil Genius]

1 hour ago, TK said:

That'd be a minimum of 14 grand. Think about this. If you just let it sit on that card & don't use it, you could have a down payment on a house for a first time home buyer. 

 

$70k house..where? 

 

Damn.

 

My down was $116k back in 2016.

[techboy]

5 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Isn't just printing money a bad thing?  If not, why haven't we done it already to pay down the debt?

 

That was my first thought, but in this situation it might be more complicated than that.

 

One of the most devastating parts of the Great Depression was deflation. It seems like lower prices would be good, but they cause consumers to wait to see if the price drops even more, killing spending. Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the Fed, was/is one of the foremost students of the Great Depression, and he got the nickname "Helicopter Ben" by postulating that in an extreme scenario (like, for example, the Great Depression) the government could drop money on people from helicopters.

 

Ordinarily I'd say that such a program would risk hyperinflation, but in this case, there's such a drop off in spending power, maybe not. QE was supposed to cause inflation too, but it's been low for years now.

 

There's a pretty good explanation of the history and proponents of helicopter money on Wikipedia (it well predates Bernanke), and there are some big names in economics making arguments for it and why it might not be as negative as classical economics might predict. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money

 

My first impression is also that this will never happen in a million years, but Trump is hardly a traditional conservative, so if he gets it in his head to try it for some reason, who knows? Still, probably not, especially since it was co-sponsored by one of his primary Twitter targets from "The Squad".

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

7 hours ago, techboy said:

My first impression is also that this will never happen in a million years, but Trump is hardly a traditional conservative, so if he gets it in his head to try it for some reason, who knows? Still, probably not, especially since it was co-sponsored by one of his primary Twitter targets from "The Squad".

 

He’ll demand his face be put on it.

[skinsmarydu]

5 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

He’ll demand his face be put on it.

And that'll make it the ugliest American coin ever minted. Shivers. 

[Supernatural24]

16 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Isn't just printing money a bad thing?  If not, why haven't we done it already to pay down the debt?

It’s not a bad thing, the US does it all the time. This situation should have woken your eyes up to it not being a bad thing. 
 

And why pay down our debt when we can make others dependent on us?

[Larry]

5 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

He’ll demand his face be put on it.

 

I got no problem with putting Trump's face on pretty much every thing about this cluster ****.  

[Larry]

Well, the IRS web page is still telling me "we will update this page when we have scheduled a payment date".  

 

But my credit union says the IRS put the money in my account today.  They consider it "pending", because the transaction is dated tomorrow.

[EmirOfShmo]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

Well, the IRS web page is still telling me "we will update this page when we have scheduled a payment date".  

 

But my credit union says the IRS put the money in my account today.  They consider it "pending", because the transaction is dated tomorrow.

Your tax dollars hard at work. The IRS system is horrible. 

My mother-in-law passed away October, 2019. Her 2019 taxes were filed in January. We checked the IRS site yesterday based on an earlier post in here. She's due to receive a check - or we need to provide the correct direct deposit account (which we declined to do). I'm guessing we'll get a check mailed to us sometime (we used our address to file her taxes). Not sure what to do with it if we get it. 

 

Edit: Anybody here filed for the PUA (Pandemic Unemployment Assistance)? If so, is the amount prorated somehow or is it a flat $600? 

Edited May 3, 2020 by EmirOfShmo

[just654]

51 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

 

Edit: Anybody here filed for the PUA (Pandemic Unemployment Assistance)? If so, is the amount prorated somehow or is it a flat $600? 

it is additional $600 a week on top of what ever you qualify for in your state. 

[TK]

23 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

$70k house..where? 

 

Damn.

 

My down was $116k back in 2016.

Move south.

 

First time home owners can go as low as a 5% down payment.

[techboy]

7 hours ago, EmirOfShmo said:

Not sure what to do with it if we get it. 

 

I was recently reading a post on Bogleheads from someone else in the same situation. Apparently there's a process to send it back. I wouldn't cash it.

 

I'd also probably wait a little to let them continue to work out the kinks before trying to deal with it.

Edited May 4, 2020 by techboy

[Captain Wiggles]

Got my check in da mail today.

 

Already spent it tho. On this.

 

 

Thx Uncle Sam.

[tshile]

On 5/2/2020 at 6:12 PM, TheGreatBuzz said:

Isn't just printing money a bad thing?  If not, why haven't we done it already to pay down the debt?

Done right, in certain positions, it’s not a bad idea. the US dollar has something other currencies don’t. 
 

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2020/04/21/839374663/why-is-the-fed-sending-billions-of-dollars-all-over-the-world

 

just printing money is a bad thing. But doing it for a reason and with good understanding of effects can be smart. Countries have ruined themselves doing it. We’re in a unique position and this is a unique issue where our economic fundamentals were not bad and it wasn’t an economic issue that caused this. Ie: it could really be significantly less painful to prop things up and let them resume when they’re ready than to just ride it out and see what happens. 

 

[LD0506]

Injecting money at the bottom via stimulus checks, etc., promotes economic activity, period. It bubbles its way back up through various channels, suppliers and transport, etc., but still will end up back at the top. That's the whole point of federal taxation, you skim off that money at the top and then reinject it back in for jobs/ infrastructure, whatever, and the whole process repeats. If done regularly it not only pays for itself but after a couple of cycles you are playing with house money, you're reinjecting the economic profits back in and have recouped your initial payout. 

 

When you simply cut taxes, that reduces the amount collected at the top and the majority of that ends up being siphoned off elsewhere to areas that do not have the same economic multiplier effects, ie. stock market, offshore tax havens, real estate excess, etc. 

 

Yang's platform of a UBI was simplistic in some respects but at least got the subject into the national conversation. Overwhelmingly the numbers don't lie but tend to run up against the bitter Puritanical streak of people that object to anyone getting something "for free", which is bs. 

 

The collateral advantages of it MORE than pay for the effort just in increased jobs, reduced crime, neighborhood stability, better health through improved diet, etc. The most intractable opposition to it is conceptual, overcoming that tight-lipped demographic that think "those people" are supposed to suffer cuz doG said so. Consider all the advantages of planting trees throughout a neighborhood, shade in the summer, windbreaks in the winter, CO2 capture, environment for wildlife, etc., but no, cut 'em all down because we don't want to have to rake leaves in the fall.

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, LD0506 said:

Injecting money at the bottom via stimulus checks, etc., promotes economic activity, period. It bubbles its way back up through various channels, suppliers and transport, etc., but still will end up back at the top. That's the whole point of federal taxation, you skim off that money at the top and then reinject it back in for jobs/ infrastructure, whatever, and the whole process repeats. If done regularly it not only pays for itself but after a couple of cycles you are playing with house money, you're reinjecting the economic profits back in and have recouped your initial payout. 

 

When you simply cut taxes, that reduces the amount collected at the top and the majority of that ends up being siphoned off elsewhere to areas that do not have the same economic multiplier effects, ie. stock market, offshore tax havens, real estate excess, etc. 

 

Yang's platform of a UBI was simplistic in some respects but at least got the subject into the national conversation. Overwhelmingly the numbers don't lie but tend to run up against the bitter Puritanical streak of people that object to anyone getting something "for free", which is bs. 

 

The collateral advantages of it MORE than pay for the effort just in increased jobs, reduced crime, neighborhood stability, better health through improved diet, etc. The most intractable opposition to it is conceptual, overcoming that tight-lipped demographic that think "those people" are supposed to suffer cuz doG said so. Consider all the advantages of planting trees throughout a neighborhood, shade in the summer, windbreaks in the winter, CO2 capture, environment for wildlife, etc., but no, cut 'em all down because we don't want to have to rake leaves in the fall.

 

I was and still am a big fan of Yangs. I really liked his entire approach, ideas, and overall demeanor. The only thing I disagree on is the the UBI should not be means tested for who gets it. It would be 100% across the board. If it is truly an earned income - and I believe it is - all have earned to all should receive it Otherwise it becomes a welfare. The money is not wasted on high earners. They will spend it just like others.  I wish he had been given more of a chance. Maybe 2024 if Biden loses or 2028. 

[Dr. Do Itch Big]

On 5/2/2020 at 6:19 PM, TK said:

That'd be a minimum of 14 grand. Think about this. If you just let it sit on that card & don't use it, you could have a down payment on a house for a first time home buyer. 

damn the Bay Area. I can’t afford **** out here. 

[ShredSkins]

12 hours ago, clietas said:

Got my check in da mail today.

 

Already spent it tho. On this.

 

 

 

Thx Uncle Sam.

Lol nice! mine allegedly gets deposited wednesday. I've got my eye on Gibson Les Paul for sale locally. Considering I've had to work through this whole thing (security) I'm definately treating myself.

[skinsmarydu]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

The money is not wasted on high earners. They will spend it just like others.  

This is where we disagree. A multi millionaire will save it.("They pay me to stay rich!") If you can't spend what you have....

And SS would be totally funded if there wasn't a cap. 

 

[goskins10]

4 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said:

This is where we disagree. A multi millionaire will save it.("They pay me to stay rich!") If you can't spend what you have....

And SS would be totally funded if there wasn't a cap. 

 

 

So to me this is a mix. I think they already spend. But fair enough, let's say they keep it. In the end the pure numbers of people that have that much money is not enough to put it off balance. So even if they don't spend it, I still want to give it to them. Takes away the welfare argument, at least mostly 🙂   Removing the means testing is a big deal as it changes it from welfare to a pure UBI. 

 

SS is a different conversation. I have always thought the CAP should be removed. You could not only fully fund it you could also give reasonable COL increases instead of pennies they currently approve.