The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Lathum]

Clearly she learned her lesson

I’m sure you woke up in a great mood. �� pic.twitter.com/4Ep2RDdqFt

— Parlertakes���� (@parlertakes) February 5, 2021

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Clearly she learned her lesson

I’m sure you woke up in a great mood. �� pic.twitter.com/4Ep2RDdqFt
— Parlertakes���� (@parlertakes) February 5, 2021

I love one of the responses

Imagine waking up literally laughing.

I’m pretty sure that’s like a 99% indicator you’re a Batman villain.

— ButGorsuch! (@Ignorem62281500) February 5, 2021

SI

[Ksyrup]

If only Biden could have ramped up Covid production as quickly as he mobilized tyranny in *checks notes* 2 weeks, we'd all be vaccinated by now!

[kingfc22]

Saw Air Force One was trending on Twitter and thought to myself, I wonder where Biden is off to. Only to find out it was due to Fox News pushing this as a message, “ Biden flying to Delaware despite CDC warnings to” with a bunch of replies that he’s vaccinated, on AF1 and on and on.

These clowns at Fox are something else

[Ksyrup]

Just wait until his first golf trip!

[Edward64]

Looks unlikely for bipartianship with the $1.9B bill.

The messaging of "risk is not too much, risk is too little" resonates well with me. Unless the economy doesn't come back, the Dems should leverage that mantra in 2022. But the talking heads on CNBC were pretty optimistic about 2H with all the good vaccine news.

[tarcone]

I cant find it. Are they giving $2000 for dependents over 17 in this new package?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I cant find it. Are they giving $2000 for dependents over 17 in this new package?

Yes. Unless they pull something shady in the last hour, adult dependents are getting the full $2,000.

[bob]

Looks like they are gonna reduce the income thresholds though

[ISiddiqui]

Though apparently there is still a moving target. Wyman and Sanders still want to keep the same income limits. Depends on how strong Manchin and Tester are for further limits.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[tarcone]

Any idea what that threshold might be?

[bob]

The latest version under discussion would send $1,400 payments to individuals earning under $50,000; and $2,800 to married couples earning under $100,000.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...rce=reddit.com

[albionmoonlight]

That might be the right decision policy-wise.

Seems really stupid politically. You don't want to give anything that seems "less" than what Trump did.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by bob

The latest version under discussion would send $1,400 payments to individuals earning under $50,000; and $2,800 to married couples earning under $100,000.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...rce=reddit.com

Right, and it starts phasing out from there. That article did say Adult Dependents are still going to be in.

[bob]

The whole “people making 300k could get a stimulus” is dumb. A family with 4 kids would get $900. Seems pretty minor given the same people wanting to waive $50k in student loans, and someone making 300k probably is paying a lot in taxes.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bob

The latest version under discussion would send $1,400 payments to individuals earning under $50,000; and $2,800 to married couples earning under $100,000.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...rce=reddit.com

Are Democrats going to take 2 months to figure out means testing on disaster relief? Good lord.

[RainMaker]

Also basing it on 2019 income seems really dumb when people had their problems in 2020. So my friend who works in theater lighting likely made over $50k in 2019 but practically nothing but unemployment in 2020 thanks to every theater being shut down.

They can take solace that they won't have control of congress in 2 years. The party loves being in the minority.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by bob

The whole “people making 300k could get a stimulus” is dumb. A family with 4 kids would get $900. Seems pretty minor given the same people wanting to waive $50k in student loans, and someone making 300k probably is paying a lot in taxes.

This is an interesting aspect of the payments. Saying that people who earn over X don't need the money is being very assumptive. A family with a yearly income of $125K in LA or Chicago or (insert high cost of living areas here) probably lives differently than a family making $125K in a small town. Also, people have different expenses and live differently even in the same area.

There's too much concern over who doesn't need it instead of getting the money out to those who do, especially since the amount is based on what was earned before the lockdowns started.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by rjolley

There's too much concern over who doesn't need it instead of getting the money out to those who do, especially since the amount is based on what was earned before the lockdowns started.

This is the part that bothers me the most.

[Brian Swartz]

They do have to take whatever time is required to find something their own members will pass or that will peel off a few Republican votes. That's simply the nature of a divided Senate, is it not? It's not as if 'Democrats' is a monolithic entity that all wants the same thing, just like 'Biden voters on FOFC' is a group of diverse interests.

[Edward64]

I'm all for some sort of means testing. It makes pretty good sense to me that "as a whole" (because there will be exceptions) family making $150+K in 2019 don't need it as much as family making < $50K. I rather those "excess" funds get reallocated for other things (e.g. extending unemployment, small business etc.).

The assumption many make is that the stimulus check will get spent vs being saved. There is enough evidence that there is a substantial amount of people that is not spending the money but putting it into savings/debt repayment. See couple articles below.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/fewe...heres-why.html

While lower-income families need the payments to put food on the table, many middle-class families saved their first and second payments. Opportunity Insights, a nonpartisan economic research institute at Harvard University, estimates that “households earning more than $78,000 will spend only $105 of the $1,400 stimulus check they receive,” based on how those families spent the prior payments.

“Targeting the next round of stimulus payments toward lower-income households would save substantial resources that could be used to support other programs, with minimal impact on economic activity,” write economists Raj Chetty, John Friedman and Michael Stepner, the authors of the Opportunity Insights report.

Article on first stimulus. Savings rate ranges from 23% (those collecting UI) to 36% overall. Rest is on consumption and debt repayment.

How Americans Spent $1,200 Stimulus Checks

[bob]

To me the issue is really using 2019/2020 income as a placeholder for wealth, but those don’t necessarily correlate. But I’m not sure how best to address a complicated Situation. Again, is this stimulus or “survival” payments. If its not stimulus, expand unemployment and the general safety net instead of direct payments. It is easy to slice other people out as well - why are retirees getting anything? Their situation didn’t change

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by bob

To me the issue is really using 2019/2020 income as a placeholder for wealth, but those don’t necessarily correlate. But I’m not sure how best to address a complicated Situation. Again, is this stimulus or “survival” payments. If its not stimulus, expand unemployment and the general safety net instead of direct payments. It is easy to slice other people out as well - why are retirees getting anything? Their situation didn’t change

Ideally, it's for both survival and stimulus. But if I had to pick a priority order, it should be survival first which, as a side effect, will help some stimulus.

Most retirees are probably living on less than <$50K AGI so they would benefit. But your question is valid, why not exclude retirees. They are getting fixed income already. The obvious answer is the political impact if they exclude seniors (e.g. anyone drawing social security & medicare).

FWIW, there are 61M collecting social security or 1 in 5.

[miked]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Also basing it on 2019 income seems really dumb when people had their problems in 2020. So my friend who works in theater lighting likely made over $50k in 2019 but practically nothing but unemployment in 2020 thanks to every theater being shut down.

They can take solace that they won't have control of congress in 2 years. The party loves being in the minority.

I think I mentioned that in the other thread. My wife is a private consultant with business that dropped about 90% during the pandemic. Our 2020 income filing will be significantly less, but we get very little based on the formula.

[ISiddiqui]

How are you going to use 2020 income? Wait to send out checks until after April?

That also sounds problematic.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm all for some sort of means testing. It makes pretty good sense to me that "as a whole" (because there will be exceptions) family making $150+K in 2019 don't need it as much as family making < $50K. I rather those "excess" funds get reallocated for other things (e.g. extending unemployment, small business etc.).

The assumption many make is that the stimulus check will get spent vs being saved. There is enough evidence that there is a substantial amount of people that is not spending the money but putting it into savings/debt repayment. See couple articles below.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/fewe...heres-why.html


Article on first stimulus. Savings rate ranges from 23% (those collecting UI) to 36% overall. Rest is on consumption and debt repayment.

How Americans Spent $1,200 Stimulus Checks

This reinforces what i have said before. give everyone the stimulus. The people making 300-400K a year would put a lot of it back into the local economy. I know we would.

What I am wondering is could they do some kind of voucher system. Give cash to people making under X/ year. For anyone above that threshold they get a voucher, coupon book, whatever you want to call it that they can only use at local business or business with under X employees. I realize this would require some logistics, but seems like something that would really help small businesses.

[Swaggs]

Why not just get it to everyone and correct it at tax time next year? Not an unsolvable problem.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Why not just get it to everyone and correct it at tax time next year? Not an unsolvable problem.

It just shifts the time frame of when we decided who should not get the money. That is what all this discussion is about. Who is worthy and who is not worthy of getting the money.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Why not just get it to everyone and correct it at tax time next year? Not an unsolvable problem.

I suspect a lot of people would just stow it away so they wouldn't have to be in the hole come tax season

[RainMaker]

[/list]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

How are you going to use 2020 income? Wait to send out checks until after April?

That also sounds problematic.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Why not just give it to everyone? It is disaster relief.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm all for some sort of means testing. It makes pretty good sense to me that "as a whole" (because there will be exceptions) family making $150+K in 2019 don't need it as much as family making < $50K. I rather those "excess" funds get reallocated for other things (e.g. extending unemployment, small business etc.).

The assumption many make is that the stimulus check will get spent vs being saved. There is enough evidence that there is a substantial amount of people that is not spending the money but putting it into savings/debt repayment. See couple articles below.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/fewe...heres-why.html

Article on first stimulus. Savings rate ranges from 23% (those collecting UI) to 36% overall. Rest is on consumption and debt repayment.

How Americans Spent $1,200 Stimulus Checks

Some additional evidence that not everyone needs a stimulus check. Find a way to means test and give it to those families/small businesses really in need.

American Spending Outlook Survey 2021 | Money

First, we’ll focus on the good. For the haves, 2020 not only failed to hurt their finances but sometimes caused them to advance. More than four in 10 Americans say their financial situation is excellent or good now (45%), with another 35% describing it as fair. Just a fifth of respondents say their current financial situation is poor (20%).

Unsurprisingly, people who earn over six figures are the most inclined to say they’re doing well now, with 77% reporting a good or excellent financial position. Retirees come next (63%). Baby Boomers, or those born between 1946 and 1964, are the generation most likely to describe their situation as good or excellent (59%); homeowners report the same strong financial standing.

Overall, a quarter of adults say their finances are actually somewhat or much better now than they were a year ago. This includes 37% of respondents with post-graduate degrees and 34% of Gen Zers, or those born between 1997 and 2012.

However, there are significant differences across ethnicities. While some 49% of white respondents say their position is excellent or good, only 36% of Black respondents and 27% of Hispanic respondents say the same.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

It just shifts the time frame of when we decided who should not get the money. That is what all this discussion is about. Who is worthy and who is not worthy of getting the money.

Originally Posted by Lathum

I suspect a lot of people would just stow it away so they wouldn't have to be in the hole come tax season

I would imagine many of the folks that do not meet the income limits, and/or do not need it, already pay quarterly estimated taxes and/or are used to owing at tax time. If they know or expect they are going to make enough to not qualify, it is not going to have much of a negative effect if they hold it. If we are doing relief checks because it is the humane thing to do for people that are suffering and struggling, it should be ASAP in my opinion. It should be about providing immediate assistance, with the impact to the economy a good, secondary benefit.

[Brian Swartz]

I think the overall economic impact is the primary reason for it.

[miked]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

How are you going to use 2020 income? Wait to send out checks until after April?

That also sounds problematic.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I think it sounds great

Once you file, you are eligible for your stimulus. I would likely get close to the full amount based on 2020, based on 2019, not even close. I'm almost ready to file, I'd gladly wait a few weeks to actually get something.

[PilotMan]

Just the opposite for me. I'll wait to file.

[Brian Swartz]

I thought the point, which I basically agree with, is that it's late as it is and economy can't afford to wait. If it can't, then we can't wait for 2020 numbers. Not to mention that a lot of the people who need it the most are not the kind of people who will file early, which kind of defeats the purpose

[NobodyHere]

So Democrats are arguing that a $15 minimum wage can be a part of budget reconciliation because the CBO says it will raise the deficit (albeit by a measley $54 billion, but who's counting at this point).

I guess that's the creative legislating that many of you are looking for.

[PilotMan]

The R's didn't care about the 800bln or so they bumped it for the rich. Now I haven't looked at the specifics, but it seems like one of those might have a wider ranging impact for the cost.

[Brian Swartz]

Not sure what thread to put this in, but I'll put it here for now. Being a professional shopper for the past 9-10 months now has taught me a number of things. One of those is to be more negative and pessimistic on climate change than ever before as I get a picture of people's purchasing habits. I am stunned by the number of people who regularly buy things like disposable plates, not because they need them but just because they can't be bothered to do dishes, so they just want to 'make them a memory', as it were.

We are so screwed as long as this kind of mindset is ingrained in our approach to modern life, and I'm definitely personally having struggles with being judgemental towards it.

[thesloppy]

I could see that. I struggle with justifying even the tiniest bit of my endless plastics consumption, let alone considering anybody/everybody else.

[RainMaker]

Remember when Democrats promised stimulus checks in a week if they got control of the Senate.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Remember when Democrats promised stimulus checks in a week if they got control of the Senate.

The glacial pace is nothing compared to the last few months under the Orange Shit-gibbon. I never expected a check in my hand within the first week. I'm amazed at what progress there's been considering Turtle didn't want to give up the Senate until like last week.

[CrimsonFox]

so happy Biden isn't going to negotiate with these assholes and just getting on with it.

[miami_fan]

I understand that they figured out what was going on before the public was harmed but this feels like it should be a slightly bigger deal.

https://www.wfla.com/news/local-news...maging-levels/

[RainMaker]

While we continue to wait on that promised stimulus check, Democrats have already lined up a tax break for the wealthy.

[tarcone]

This isnt black v white. This is poor and middle class v rich. One day we will be either a true democracy or a world like The Running Man or 1984.

Shit is going to hit the fan. I hope Im dead when it does.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

While we continue to wait on that promised stimulus check, Democrats have already lined up a tax break for the wealthy.

Which tax break is that?

[RainMaker]

SALT deduction

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

SALT deduction

I've haven't seen that as any part of an immediate legislative package, do you have a link?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I've haven't seen that as any part of an immediate legislative package, do you have a link?

Schumer and Gillibrand launch new push to permanently restore NYS’s full salt deduction | WIVT - NewsChannel 34
I am no tax expert, but the suggestion is that the SALT tax cap hurts the poor and middle class way more than it helps the rich. It seems pretty crazy if it doesn't seeing that Trump imposed the cap and the rich praised it.