cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
     
Highlighted
Participant ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Dr.V, I agree completely also. two years ago the Admin gave a 2 trillion $ tax cut to the corporations, who did stock buybacks, and the wealthy, who promptly did as you or I would - banked it. Now when it really is a freakin' catastrophe they are back again with hands out for some more socialism freedom payments. And the usual suspects are back again trying to fill the trough for them. Sure could use that 2 trillion now, eh?

Amazing how easy it is to hate the government, "socialism", the "deep state" (aka trained, experienced, competent experts) until you actually need them. Today Italy reached 627 dead in one day. That is about the equivalent of 3,500 (105,000 a month) in the USA and we are apparently on the same track albeit a week or two behind.. Certainly hope the liberals call off their hoax soon.

Highlighted
Participant ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Follower ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

From a CNBC article:

"First, the measure calculates how much you receive from the government based on your 2018 tax return."

"If your tax bill is below $600 as an individual, you get $600.  If your tax liability is above $1,200, it would be capped at $1,200."

I thought the idea was to target assistance to the people who need it most due to layoffs, reduced hours, etc.. Also to get it in the hands of people who are most likely to spend it.

Wouldn't a lower tax liability suggest that you would fall into one of these categories?

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

If people start to lose their houses and cannot pay expenses and businesses go bankrupt  that will infect the overall housing market and stocks and bonds too. A sort of "reverse trickle down effect". It is in the interest of everyone that we mitigate the risk of the weakest, not pad the accounts of the strong.

Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@grierchas wrote:

I realize everyone is groping for short term fixes which are probably necessary and reassuring, but won't all this spending and fiscal stimulus prove inflationary down the road. 


When recessions hit the economy inflation is a good thing to generate. In 2009 and 2010 congress passed 2 stimulus programs of $1.7T which included 2% reduction in employee fica tax rate and cash for clunkers.Fed has been trying to get inflation rate To its target rate of 2% for 8 years without success. Inflation has been stuck at about 1.8%. Getting inflation to 2% would help revive the economy.

Highlighted
Contributor ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Anyone that does not understand that the old US corp. tax rate of 35% was a huge disadvantage to US business is ignorant on the subject and only wants to continue to bash President Trump. I do agree that businesses should not be bailed out anymore  but unfortunately may be required. The catastrophy of the China virus will harm employees and could produce huge unemployment. A main issue is how many of us hold company stock in some form in our IRAs. What proportions of citizens will need "government bailout" if many companies go bankrupt and IRAs blow up? If you expect companies to retain earnings in some bank account after getting a tax break you certainly do not understand tax law and the disincentive for a company to "save" money.


@pudman wrote:

Dr.V, I agree completely also. two years ago the Admin gave a 2 trillion $ tax cut to the corporations, who did stock buybacks, and the wealthy, who promptly did as you or I would - banked it. Now when it really is a freakin' catastrophe they are back again with hands out for some more socialism freedom payments. And the usual suspects are back again trying to fill the trough for them. Sure could use that 2 trillion now, eh?

Amazing how easy it is to hate the government, "socialism", the "deep state" (aka trained, experienced, competent experts) until you actually need them. Today Italy reached 627 dead in one day. That is about the equivalent of 3,500 (105,000 a month) in the USA and we are apparently on the same track albeit a week or two behind. Seriously? You must not read much and undrstand what happened in Italy. Listen to the press conferences and see what is being STRONGLY suggested to curb the spread. Many cities are shutting down nonessential business to keep people at home. Never happened in Italy. Certainly hope the liberals call off their hoax soon. It's called buying votes. They need all they can get. More free stuff. I am against it all


 

Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

No Gary, that is not the case. There were those of us who are actually fiscally conservative and believed the CBO when they told us that the tax cut would NEVER pay for itself and only add to debt. And who knew that the expansion cycle would end sooner, rather than later, for one reason or another. Who never expected business to act with fiscal responsibility, and they did not, stock buybacks being the smoking gun here. I made many posts on this topic. Yes, all that caution was written off as TDS and victimizing the combative rich guy.

Yet, here we are. Getting ready to bailout those same companies and watch homeowners and workers get crushed. And even after the proof is in the pudding, those who raised the alarm are supposedly just irrational haters. Nothing ever changes.

'If you expect companies to retain earnings in some bank account after getting a tax break you certainly do not understand tax law and the disincentive for a company to "save" money.'

Think about this a bit. It literally makes my point. Those same "disadvantaged" companies were going along just fine for over 7 years before we decided to spike the punch bowl. The carrot on the stick was the promise of +3% sustained GDP growth. What you really get is one year of juice, a new normal, and ongoing deficits. If after us all getting our posteriors handed to us, you still want to defend what happened, then there is nothing much more to be said.

Also, why are we still operating with tariffs on US corporations and consumers and producers? This is an unacceptable burden, There will be no progress on trade for the next 10 months. In over three years, the progress on trade was minimal. And the chance that DJT will get re-elected is now between slim and none. The next guy will drop the tariffs and get credit for "helping business", in that regard, I guess.

Sorry man, it just is not personal, it is logical.

@Gary1952 wrote:

Anyone that does not understand that the old US corp. tax rate of 35% was a huge disadvantage to US business is ignorant on the subject and only wants to continue to bash President Trump. I do agree that businesses should not be bailed out anymore  but unfortunately may be required. The catastrophy of the China virus will harm employees and could produce huge unemployment. A main issue is how many of us hold company stock in some form in our IRAs. What proportions of citizens will need "government bailout" if many companies go bankrupt and IRAs blow up? If you expect companies to retain earnings in some bank account after getting a tax break you certainly do not understand tax law and the disincentive for a company to "save" money.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Pud being sarcastic : Certainly hope the liberals call off their hoax soon. 

Gary : It's called buying votes. They need all they can get. More free stuff. I am against it all

Sorry but I have no idea what you are saying. Are you saying that it IS a liberal hoax? I was being sarcastic. (pssst - it isn't a liberal hoax to bring down your man) Are you saying that ANY aid for ANYONE is buying votes? By whom? GOP and Dems or only (fill in blank). Are you saying that no aid should be given to ANYONE under ANY circumstances? Not clear and me no savvy. I think that if the GOP can give 2 trillion to the rich in a time of plenty then surely they can give 2 trillion to the poor and middle class in a time of calamity. I know to conservatives poverty is a moral failing but surely this is exceptional, n'est-ce pas? Now go wash your hands and stop touching your face!

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Explorer ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Socialism not such a bad word now in Washington....  they will spin it as something different though.  

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Thanks to the Democrats that demanded help to worse off people and extended/improved unemployment benefits the package is now 2T. It seems that corporations will not be allowed to do stocks buyback with the aid, as they did with the Trump tax breaks. I heard that dividends may be on the chopping block too. We'll see.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@sugarhill6 wrote:

Socialism not such a bad word now in Washington....  they will spin it as something different though.  


Exactly. Republicans, Democrats, and independents - all become socialists when they want to spend our money that we never paid. This money will add to the debt, and so, people do not care how they get their money. In the end, everybody will be happy. These negotiations are not really negotiations. Everybody brings their points of view, and they just add it to the pot, and the pot keeps growing. If McConnell thought that he did want to negotiate with Pelosi, that was ok with Pelosi, but she got she wanted anyway through these "negotiations." Essentially, we have a queen running our country, except that she is younger than Queen Elizabeth II and has a lot of power unlike Queen Elizabeth II. I have no problem with it.

Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@sugarhill6 wrote:

Socialism not such a bad word now in Washington....  they will spin it as something different though.  


If the government is going to give me money I will take it. It’s an alternative form of a tax cut. I will spend it on a new computer, tax courses and up grade to a large screen digital TV. NJ Also gave me a tax cut by doubling my veterans exemption.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@Intruder wrote:

@sugarhill6 wrote:

Socialism not such a bad word now in Washington....  they will spin it as something different though.  


If the government is going to give me money I will take it. It’s an alternative form of a tax cut. I will spend it on a new computer, tax courses and up grade to a large screen digital TV. NJ Also gave me a tax cut by doubling my veterans exemption.


@Intruder 

Each to his or her own.  If I get a check for some unknown reason, all of it will go to our local food pantry for those in need.  I just gave them some money upon hearing from a friend that their shelves were bare.   We're all in this together.  

ctyankee

Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@ctyankee wrote:

@Intruder wrote:

@sugarhill6 wrote:

Socialism not such a bad word now in Washington....  they will spin it as something different though.  


If the government is going to give me money I will take it. It’s an alternative form of a tax cut. I will spend it on a new computer, tax courses and up grade to a large screen digital TV. NJ Also gave me a tax cut by doubling my veterans exemption.


@Intruder 

Each to his or her own.  If I get a check for some unknown reason, all of it will go to our local food pantry for those in need.  I just gave them some money upon hearing from a friend that their shelves were bare.   We're all in this together.  

ctyankee


Yankee

I make annual charitable distributions from my IRAs which are non taxable.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Explorer ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

This is a bizarre proposal. I am a supporter of welfare but this looks like a scatter-gun approach to sweetening a bitter pill. Commons sense says it would be more efficacious to ramp up existing means tested programs? I get the urgency of this, but not everyone needs this and are just going to go out and buy a new iPhone or whatever. Surely, the money could be better spent where it's really needed.

Highlighted
Explorer ○○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments

Yes, now that both parties have embraced deficits, handouts and lack of fiscal discipline, its time to ramp up the printing presses.  Perhaps Jefferson Davis was right and Lincoln was wrong, that it is better to print money rather than sell bonds that you must pay off.  Who knows, perhaps the Confederate bonds I have will be worth more than wallpaper. 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@rumples wrote:

Yes, now that both parties have embraced deficits, handouts and lack of fiscal discipline, its time to ramp up the printing presses.  Perhaps Jefferson Davis was right and Lincoln was wrong, that it is better to print money rather than sell bonds that you must pay off.  Who knows, perhaps the Confederate bonds I have will be worth more than wallpaper. 


 Not exactly. To provide the cash to pay for the direct payments and bailouts The treasury will issue $1T or more in bonds and investors will buy some of them. The remainder of the  bonds not picked up by the prime dealers for clients will be purchased by the Federal reserve which will simply expand its balance sheet (currently around $3T) to cover the purchases. Eventually the fed will sell the bonds to banks for cash and reduce its balance sheet. 80% of the interest collected by the fed on the bonds will be returned to the Treasury.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@Mortmain wrote:

This is a bizarre proposal. I am a supporter of welfare but this looks like a scatter-gun approach to sweetening a bitter pill. Commons sense says it would be more efficacious to ramp up existing means tested programs? I get the urgency of this, but not everyone needs this and are just going to go out and buy a new iPhone or whatever. Surely, the money could be better spent where it's really needed.


Just how long will it take to ramp up existing means tested programs and to train the examiners and approve the govt forms that would have to be approved under the administrative procedures act? The purpose of the law is to get cash into the hands of taxpayers as quickly as possible so it can be spent and circulate through the economy.

If I get a payment I will spend as soon as I get it to buy a new computer, take tax courses and buy a wide screen digital TV. Nothing wrong with buying a new iPhone because it also puts money into the economy.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○○

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@Intruder wrote:

@Mortmain wrote:

This is a bizarre proposal. I am a supporter of welfare but this looks like a scatter-gun approach to sweetening a bitter pill. Commons sense says it would be more efficacious to ramp up existing means tested programs? I get the urgency of this, but not everyone needs this and are just going to go out and buy a new iPhone or whatever. Surely, the money could be better spent where it's really needed.


Just how long will it take to ramp up existing means tested programs and to train the examiners and approve the govt forms that would have to be approved under the administrative procedures act? The purpose of the law is to get cash into the hands of taxpayers as quickly as possible so it can be spent and circulate through the economy.

If I get a payment I will spend as soon as I get it to buy a new computer, take tax courses and buy a wide screen digital TV. Nothing wrong with buying a new iPhone because it also puts money into the economy.


@Intruder 

No.  That new computer, widescreen TV and iPhone do not put money into the economy effectively.  Sure, Costco or Verizon will be glad to get your money, but they're not going out of business, are they?

Meanwhile, there's a new restaurant in my town that features locally sourced produce.  The owner had to close for sit-down meals and is only doing take-out.  Rather than lay off his hostess, she is delivering orders.  Allowing take-out also allows him to keep on some of his kitchen staff.  So ... if I place a take-out order (and others do as well), maybe he doesn't go out of business.  Meanwhile, some of his employees are still employed and can pay their bills or buy things, thus keeping others afloat.  The restauranteur can also pay the small local farmers which might help keep them afloat and pay their employees.  That sort of economic stimulus will do far more than your widescreen TV will ever do.    

ctyankee

  

 

Highlighted
Valued Contributor

Re: Senate Proposal for direct payments


@ctyankee wrote:

@Intruder wrote:

@Mortmain wrote:

This is a bizarre proposal. I am a supporter of welfare but this looks like a scatter-gun approach to sweetening a bitter pill. Commons sense says it would be more efficacious to ramp up existing means tested programs? I get the urgency of this, but not everyone needs this and are just going to go out and buy a new iPhone or whatever. Surely, the money could be better spent where it's really needed.


Just how long will it take to ramp up existing means tested programs and to train the examiners and approve the govt forms that would have to be approved under the administrative procedures act? The purpose of the law is to get cash into the hands of taxpayers as quickly as possible so it can be spent and circulate through the economy.

If I get a payment I will spend as soon as I get it to buy a new computer, take tax courses and buy a wide screen digital TV. Nothing wrong with buying a new iPhone because it also puts money into the economy.


@Intruder 

No.  That new computer, widescreen TV and iPhone do not put money into the economy effectively.  Sure, Costco or Verizon will be glad to get your money, but they're not going out of business, are they?

Meanwhile, there's a new restaurant in my town that features locally sourced produce.  The owner had to close for sit-down meals and is only doing take-out.  Rather than lay off his hostess, she is delivering orders.  Allowing take-out also allows him to keep on some of his kitchen staff.  So ... if I place a take-out order (and others do as well), maybe he doesn't go out of business.  Meanwhile, some of his employees are still employed and can pay their bills or buy things, thus keeping others afloat.  The restauranteur can also pay the small local farmers which might help keep them afloat and pay their employees.  That sort of economic stimulus will do far more than your widescreen TV will ever do.    

ctyankee

  

 


The purpose of the govt payments is to have consumers spend it immediately to get $ to businesses who can keep employees at work instead of laying them off. Buying cell phones and TVs will provide revenue to the entire supply chain. Small businesses will also receive funding under the proposed legislation.

As for using take out for the govt money many governments have closed all non essential businesses, e.g., NJ and NYC, which includes restaurants.

You don’t seem to be informed of how the wide spread quarantines are effecting the economy.

0 Kudos
Announcements

Morningstar is here to help you respond to the Coronavirus crisis.