Rewarding fiscal irresponsibility...

[Gravy Train 974]

It's no longer a tax credit, the IRS is now issuing $300 monthly checks to the too-WIDE pool of eligibility, including those who now have no work incentives/requirements.  

It's absolutely an effective stimulus, but becomes basic income policy if the benefit continues beyond December.  It's flawed and has no spend stipulation, diapers be damned.

[Dahobbs 17447]

9 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

It's no longer a tax credit, the IRS is now issuing $300 monthly checks to the too-WIDE pool of eligibility, including those who now have no work incentives/requirements.  

It's absolutely an effective stimulus, but becomes basic income policy if the benefit continues beyond December.  It's flawed and has no spend stipulation, diapers be damned.

So? The administrative burden created by having a spend stipulation would most assuredly outweigh any marginal benefit to having one. 

[Gravy Train 974]

Great win for the Banks and Chinese goods I suppose?  Fantastic mechanism to slow down the already-snail's-pace of the IRS, much like diverting FEMA resources to border response.  It's another form of entitlements the middle-class taxpayer is on the hook for, and one that I'll never realize.  I support the economic stimulus motivation, but when 60% of the first-round CARES-act stimulus payments were diverted into savings or paying down debt, these direct payments have proven marginally effective.

https://www.nber.org/digest/oct20/most-stimulus-payments-were-saved-or-applied-debt

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Gravy Train

[Enchubben 5509]

 

On 3/13/2021 at 6:23 PM, ndawg said:

I'm curious how you are preparing for the day when we lose reserve currency status.

Buy Renminbi!

[Willfully Horn 7913]

Rs used to talk about how less taxes raised more revenue. How it was possible to grow out of debt. While spending too much. Ds also spend too much, (on programs I’d rather support than the military, as it is presently sized) though D presidents also pile on less debt than their R predecessors.

The most recent historical example of serious debt reduction was after WWII. Those rates were all but confiscatory. Those who support similar taxation have more credence when it comes to addressing the debt than anyone else, to my way of thinking. Of course, I’m no expert.

[Bullneck 18987]

59 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

Great win for the Banks and Chinese goods I suppose?  Fantastic mechanism to slow down the already-snail's-pace of the IRS, much like diverting FEMA resources to border response.  It's another form of entitlements the middle-class taxpayer is on the hook for, and one that I'll never realize.  I support the economic stimulus motivation, but when 60% of the first-round CARES-act stimulus payments were diverted into savings or paying down debt, these direct payments have proven marginally effective.

https://www.nber.org/digest/oct20/most-stimulus-payments-were-saved-or-applied-debt

 

What's your point?

[Js1 85110]

1 minute ago, Bullneck said:

What's your point?

His username does NOT check out. 

[Gravy Train 974]

The title of the thread is "rewarding financial irresponsibility" and, ironically, to keep the pitchforks down and money printer hot, we're now in full-send basic income*

 

*one or more fuck trophies required

[wildcat09 29256]

2 hours ago, Gravy Train said:

It's no longer a tax credit, the IRS is now issuing $300 monthly checks to the too-WIDE pool of eligibility, including those who now have no work incentives/requirements.  

It's absolutely an effective stimulus, but becomes basic income policy if the benefit continues beyond December.  It's flawed and has no spend stipulation, diapers be damned.

Why do you say this?

[horn4life 3755]

What if funny as fucking shit is the FACTS are that Red States are the ones receiving a LOT more federal tax dollars than they take in.  It's "welfare" for these states that cannot take care of themselves.  The same states that are racing desperately to try and suppress the vote so they have some small chance of winning with ideas and politices that are not in the interest of the majority of the citizens.  

In other words Democracy and voter participation scare the shit out of the Republicans!  

The Dems are FAR, FAR from perfect, but the GOP tossed away $1.9 trillion, with 80% of that taxpayer money going to help the top 1%, and corporations that already do not pay taxes.  Debt is something that GOP Presidents have accumulated at a mind boggling pace in GOOD  economic TIMES!!!  BECAUSE the GOP inherits hand offs from the Dems that provide for the GOP largesse. But unfortunately the Dem Presidents always end up with a shitty Republican hand off and are forced to spend to try and save the country from the mess they inherited.

Wouldn't it be nice if folks like John Locke, gave a fuck about the continued GOP pattern of tax cuts that are going to "create jobs" that simply do not create the jobs promised?  Those giant debt accumulations in good times are why when you hear a Republican blame dems for the Debt, you have to always remember.... they simply do not know what the fuck they are talking about, because they are FORCED to live in a world devoid of facts, so they don't slash their wrists at recognizing their decades long stupidity....

[TwiceHorn 31282]

24 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Why do you say this?

A credit should only help in reducing taxes. No tax paid, no credit. Occasionally, that's going to result in cash back to the taxpayer, when the accounts are reconciled, presumably annually around 4/15.

If it is indeed resulting in monthly checks from the IRS, then it has gone beyond a tax credit.

Edited March 15, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[wildcat09 29256]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

A credit should only help in reducing taxes. No tax paid, no credit. Occasionally, that's going to result in cash back to the taxpayer, when the accounts are reconciled, presumably annually around 4/15.

If it is indeed resulting in monthly checks from the IRS, then it has gone beyond a tax credit.

Sure, except that refundable tax credits are a thing.

[washparkhorn 9935]

56 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

A credit should only help in reducing taxes. No tax paid, no credit. Occasionally, that's going to result in cash back to the taxpayer, when the accounts are reconciled, presumably annually around 4/15.

If it is indeed resulting in monthly checks from the IRS, then it has gone beyond a tax credit.

It is a credit per Congressional Act. It is also a stimulus, to put more money in the hands consumers and boost the economy (don't think there is disagreement with this element).

Here is the specifics:

• The 2021 child tax credit is expected to look different from that of previous years. (Check - see hypocrites with hair on fire)
• Authorized by the same legislation that created the third round of stimulus checks — the American Rescue Plan — the 2021 child tax credit will give a total of $3,600 per child up to age 6, and $3,000 per child between ages 6 and 17. (It's the law - passed by Congress)
• This money will be available in two ways: half in periodic payments throughout the latter half of 2021, and half as a credit on this year's taxes filed in 2022. 
• The child tax credit isn't itself new this year — a similar tax credit has existed for many years. In its previous forms, it boosted refunds by up to $1,400 per child, but didn't include any direct payments. 
• This year's tax credit will include more, and put money in the pockets of American families who need a boost during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• This year's child tax credit includes regular payments and a tax break (for the fiscal period (latter 2020-early 2021) - it is not permanent).
• This year's child tax credit will include both a tax credit and an option for regular payments.
• It's different from the child tax credit of previous years in many ways:
  • It's larger in total: Previous child tax credits were $2,000 per child, with up to $1,400 available as a refund. The refundable portion of the new tax credit will be $1,500 or $1,800 per child, depending on age, adding up to a total of $3,000 or $3,600 per child including direct payments.
  • It includes periodic cash payments: New for 2021 are regular payments of $250 or $300 between July and December 2021 to eligible families. The payments are optional, and if you don't take them, your full credit will be available when you file your tax return in 2022.

Bottom line - some cretins (not twicehorn) just don't want any money going to poor people. 

They have no problem with trillions of dollars going to the financial sector to prop it up, but when someone is poor and hungry - they squawk if they get $300 to boost the economy (and take care of a child). 

Sociopaths.

Edited March 15, 2021 by washparkhorn

[washparkhorn 9935]

3 hours ago, Gravy Train said:

I support the economic stimulus motivation, but when 60% of the first-round CARES-act stimulus payments were diverted into savings or paying down debt, these direct payments have proven marginally effective.

So now you are upset with stimulus because people act responsibly and pay down debt? On brand, I suppose.

• With debt burden, some go into a shell and limit spending until debt is paid off.
• Once debt is paid off, regular spending resumes and the multiplier effect of consumption returns.
• The economy needs the return of ordinary consumer spending to stave off deflationary headwinds.
• Paying down debt gets us closer to that goal, which benefits all economic actors in this nation. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by washparkhorn

[Dahobbs 17447]

3 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

So now you are upset with stimulus because people act responsibly and pay down debt? On brand, I suppose.

• With debt burden, some go into a shell and limit spending until debt is paid off.
• Once debt is paid off, regular spending resumes and the multiplier effect of consumption returns.
• The economy needs the return of ordinary consumer spending to stave off deflationary headwinds.
• Paying down debt gets us closer to that goal, which benefits all economic actors in this nation. 

More fundamentally, is there another form of stimulus that would result in a larger portion being injected into economy? Because, we damn well know it isn't supply side bullshit. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

More fundamentally, is there another form of stimulus that would result in a larger portion being injected into economy? Because, we damn well know it isn't supply side bullshit. 

Liquidity constrained households are a source of the deflationary headwinds (that we must fend off or the economy dies).

Here are the three in play (Study from the Fed (SF) in May of 2020 on what works):

First, the marginal propensity to consume out of individual transfers is particularly high when unemployment is high and liquidity constraints bind, implying fiscal multipliers near or above one.

Second, the marginal propensities to spend out of federal transfers by state and local governments are particularly high during times of fiscal strain, suggesting at least a dollar-for-dollar pass-through to spending.

Third, the fiscal multiplier on government spending when monetary policy is by the zero lower bound is around 1.5.

Overall, the evidence suggests that the output boost from the current fiscal response is likely to be large.

https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2020/may/covid-19-fiscal-multiplier-lessons-from-great-recession/

[BradInATX 9208]

I assume @JohnLocke hates PPP loans too as those reward fiscal irresponsibility as well.

[elfenix 34171]

On 3/14/2021 at 6:44 AM, Sawbonz said:

No it actually was a thing with republicans. Reagan put that aside to bankrupt the Soviet Union in the arms race and it worked. Then Bush raised taxes and it cost him the election and that was the end of republican fiscal responsibility 

it was a thing with reagan's third term understudy, and that was the last republican it was a thing with.  meanwhile, democrats continuously impose paygo on themselves.  so, yeah, still bullshit.

[hpslugga 4044]

On 3/13/2021 at 10:16 AM, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

That’s just you pretending to know things

[Gravy Train 974]

2 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Liquidity constrained households are a source of the deflationary headwinds (that we must fend off or the economy dies).

Here are the three in play (Study from the Fed (SF) in May of 2020 on what works):

First, the marginal propensity to consume out of individual transfers is particularly high when unemployment is high and liquidity constraints bind, implying fiscal multipliers near or above one.

Second, the marginal propensities to spend out of federal transfers by state and local governments are particularly high during times of fiscal strain, suggesting at least a dollar-for-dollar pass-through to spending.

Third, the fiscal multiplier on government spending when monetary policy is by the zero lower bound is around 1.5.

Overall, the evidence suggests that the output boost from the current fiscal response is likely to be large.

https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2020/may/covid-19-fiscal-multiplier-lessons-from-great-recession/

That's great when inflation isn't a thing and central banks aren't printing their asses off among an asset bubble in the longest bull market run in history.  This ball of yarn will never correct itself.

[YChang 3430]

Shout out to Washpark et al for breaking down/explaining stuff... it's helpful for novices like me as well.

Also to the op and others that disagree with the relief package, let's keep having thoughtful discussions about this. I want to learn your point of view as well. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

23 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

That's great when inflation isn't a thing and central banks aren't printing their asses off among an asset bubble in the longest bull market run in history. 

• The financial sector asset bubbles were propped up by socialist public investment of trillions into that sector as Covid emerged.
  • The financial sector, which includes 401K funds, was provided with public investment (socialism) to keep that sector intact, fortunes secure, and to keep the financial sector ready to go once Main Street started recovering from Covid.
• The Fed expects two years of reduced employment due to Covid (a major deflationary headwind) and low inflation.
• Reduced employment = Less Consumer spending.
• Less consumer spending = Lower GDP and headwinds to growth.

Deflation is a death knell for our economy. The Fed knows it. The Treasury knows it. Economists know it. 

People who haven't opened up an economics textbook in years (or ever) are using an old trope (Deficits!!!) that is not relevant to our current economic situation. 

[henrygandorf 29177]

concerned republicans - i guess direct payments to those in need are ok as long as they spend it to stimulate the economy instead of paying down debt.

also concerned republicans - student loan forgiveness makes absolutely no sense to me, why on earth would i support this?

[hayden_horn 11360]

17 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

concerned republicans - i guess direct payments to those in need are ok as long as they spend it to stimulate the economy instead of paying down debt.

also concerned republicans - student loan forgiveness makes absolutely no sense to me, why on earth would i support this?

also also concerned republicans - i mean, why do they have such high student loan debt anyways? in my day, i pulled myself up by my bootstraps, and worked a job while going to school to pay for school. lazy, no account youth.

[henrygandorf 29177]

7 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

also also concerned republicans - i mean, why do they have such high student loan debt anyways? in my day, i pulled myself up by my bootstraps, and worked a job while going to school to pay for school. lazy, no account youth.

to be fair, most republicans went to college in the 90's.

the 1890's.

[Gravy Train 974]

31 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

concerned republicans - i guess direct payments to those in need are ok as long as they spend it to stimulate the economy instead of paying down debt.

also concerned republicans - student loan forgiveness makes absolutely no sense to me, why on earth would i support this?

Concerned Democrats - "Have you tried just throwing a few squares at the plebes while looking the other way?  We do that with our southern borders and it's all working out just fine!  No, we don't need to address the root of the problem just yet, these tasty squares will hold them over until the next administration anyways!"

Concerned Republicans - "Have you tried doing nothing about this while talking around the problem?  Deflection is a far cheaper method, bro!  I mean, someone's gotta pay the maintenance schedule for the Corporate Learjet."

[YChang 3430]

29 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

Concerned Democrats - "Have you tried just throwing a few squares at the plebes while looking the other way?  We do that with our southern borders and it's all working out just fine!  No, we don't need to address the root of the problem just yet, these tasty squares will hold them over until the next administration anyways!"

Concerned Republicans - "Have you tried doing nothing about this while talking around the problem?  Deflection is a far cheaper method, bro!  I mean, someone's gotta pay the maintenance schedule for the Corporate Learjet."

Border/immigration is definitely broken and has been for awhile. Having an economy that works for more Americans and not just 1%-er types is also a problem.

Current issue with the border, in your opinion what would quality as “squares being tossed at the plebes?” 

[Gravy Train 974]

"We're gonna fix immigration, but don't come now," type messaging, and likely poor PR by the White House to Mexico and the rest of Central America.  The unfortunate collateral to granting DACA amnesty might influence families to send off more of their children, for at least an opportunity to enroll in public schools, find a free meal/shelter and potentially land a future DACA-type fortune.

Free flights to other border towns and diverting FEMA resources to pick up for CBP is bad PR to the American taxpayer as well.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Gravy Train

[henrygandorf 29177]

that's why nobody tried to cross the border when trump was president.  they had a much better publicist.

[StassneyHorn 6540]

3 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

• The financial sector asset bubbles were propped up by socialist public investment of trillions into that sector as Covid emerged.
  • The financial sector, which includes 401K funds, was provided with public investment (socialism) to keep that sector intact, fortunes secure, and to keep the financial sector ready to go once Main Street started recovering from Covid. 

That sub point is pretty brutal unless you were in a hurry and needed to yada yada yada 

[SaucyJack 3487]

4 hours ago, BradInATX said:

I assume @JohnLocke hates PPP loans too as those reward fiscal irresponsibility as well.

Remind me again, the limit on those is $3600?

 

10 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

"We're gonna fix immigration, but don't come now," type messaging, and likely poor PR by the White House to Mexico and the rest of Central America.  The unfortunate collateral to granting DACA amnesty might influence families to send off more of their children, for at least an opportunity to enroll in public schools, find a free meal/shelter and potentially land a future DACA-type fortune.

Free flights to other border towns and diverting FEMA resources to pick up for CBP is bad PR to the American taxpayer as well.

Reagan wanted open borders in 1980 and amnesty for "illegal aliens". Fascinating exchange most Rs don't know. At 2:20. 

 

 

[Gravy Train 974]

13 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

that's why nobody tried to cross the border when trump was president.  they had a much better publicist.

We're not supposed to discuss enforcement of the current law and amnesty quotas already in place, are we?  Humane means of immigration exist through consulates, but it's not a swift process, nor accommodating enough to the masses who annually exceed these quotas, to the tune of one million annually.  It's that piece of the system that's actually "broken," right now, not enforcement or states' rights.

[fattyflattie 4636]

51 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

that's why nobody tried to cross the border when trump was president.  they had a much better publicist.

Ah, whataboutism’s little bro, Rememberwhenism.  Cool cool.  

[bolverk 29399]

Don't let the assholes change the topic to an immigration debate. This here thread is supposed to about how "Red states are bailing out the Blue ones" in the recovery bill as far as I recall.

[henrygandorf 29177]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Ah, whataboutism’s little bro, Rememberwhenism.  Cool cool.  

he blamed it on messaging and pr, and you expect people to leave that alone?  the border is fucked.  it was fucked when biden got sworn in.  it was fucked when trump got sworn in.  it'll be fucked as long as any of us are breathing.

[workswithseed 2036]

3 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

also also concerned republicans - i mean, why do they have such high student loan debt anyways? in my day, i pulled myself up by my bootstraps, and worked a job while going to school to pay for school. lazy, no account youth.

Going to pay my welding school bill in a few months, so bootstraps pulled up.

[horn4life 3755]

I am actually extremely fiscally conservative.  I was OUTRAGED over adding $1.9 trillion Republican budget busting tax cuts for the richest in our country.  Simply because fiscally it was stupid as fucking shit.  To be fair, in the 1940's up until the late 1960's tax cuts did spur economic growth and hiring. But that was when a CEO made maybe 30 times the salary of the average worker.  So tax cuts naturally would not be completely skewed to the richest, and thus there would be a money multiplier effect.

This same philosophy today... stupid as fucking shit.  Simply as in past decades there was not near the mobility of money into investments we have today.  Give a billionaire a $200 million tax cut, and he may buy a mine in Indonesia.  There simply is nowhere remotely near the money multiplier stimulative effect. This 1.9 trillion should honestly have been spent months and months ago.  But the GOP was not interested once the millionaires got their STRINGS FREE!!!! checks last Spring.  In a program that was SPECIFICALLY designed not to have any accountability for the administration the dollars for the richest Americans that flowed like water last year.

But being fiscally conservative does NOT mean you do not spend money, it also does not mean you never, ever, ever invest in anything but Debt for more millionaire tax cuts.  Which is what "conservative" means for the GOP currently.  Basically the GOP "fiscal conservative" is simply a whiner.... that whines really, really loud ONLY when a Dem is President.   But Republicans are NOT fiscally conservative, they are socially conservative, with a decent dose or racism baked into their economic thinking.

You see if you give a poor person $1400 they spend nearly every last penny, in a manner that is a LOT more local than the dollars you give to the wealthiest.  And that very simple fact that is impossible for Republicans to grasp is why they simply do not understand economics.  For example, Student loans are burdensome to our youth, and hurt future economic activity.  But this move was made to accommodate, lower taxes for the well heeled.  Incarcerating shit tons of brown and black people for drugs while nearly always allowing for non-prison sentences for lighter skinned more financially secure folks is fucking stupid as shit fiscally.  Prisons are fucking expensive, and the long term costs of decreased lifetime wages that are the direct result of serving time, get heaped onto the total cost.  It is simply fiscally stupid to keep GOP policies in place here. But again, you need to remember Republicans are NOT fiscally conservative, not in the least.

I could go on and on and on...

[elfenix 34171]

the GOP's raison d'etre since the passage of the income tax back in 1913 has been to eliminate it.  they had to start adopting the racists because it turns out that shoving the burden of paying for government that exists to protect the wealth of the wealthy onto poors isn't a winning electoral strategy. 

[LABEVO 928]

 

[Brisketexan 104624]

7 minutes ago, LABEVO said:

 

Excuse me....I was told by the greatest financial genius the nation has ever seen, that master of fiscal management and conservatism that if Biden was elected, "the stock market will crash."

So, clearly, the report above is fake news, because the most brilliant and exalted DJT cannot be wrong.  Ever.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

On 3/16/2021 at 12:29 PM, horn4life said:

But being fiscally conservative does NOT mean you do not spend money, it also does not mean you never, ever, ever invest in anything but Debt for more millionaire tax cuts. 

Here, here.

I liked your whole post, but this thought here is very important. Taking the bolded part in a very distilled way: If being fiscally conservative means you do not spend money, then no one should attend college or be educated.

Education represents an investment in people. An investment for the future that ends up, for many, being a life changing experience. Every American should demand at a local, state, and federal level the best education and educational outcomes for all of our citizens. That investment in people changes the world.

[Biff Tannen 45495]

1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Here, here.

I liked your whole post, but this thought here is very important. Taking the bolded part in a very distilled way: If being fiscally conservative means you do not spend money, then no one should attend college or be educated.

Education represents an investment in people. An investment for the future that ends up, for many, being a life changing experience. Every American should demand at a local, state, and federal level the best education and educational outcomes for all of our citizens. That investment in people changes the world.

The American Dream has become get all the money you can get your hands on and make sure no one else can get any.  It's a zero sum game.  

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

19 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

The American Dream has become get all the money you can get your hands on and make sure no one else can get any.  It's a zero sum game.  

It certainly is. Don't people that subscribe to that philosophy pay attention to history,  literature, and movies? It never ends well. On second thought, I suppose that is a potential reason why the liberal arts are so denigrated these days. They keep uplifting people with character as the heroes and  heroines  and that doesn't work so well with greed.

[ndawg 1242]

14 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

The American Dream has become get all the money you can get your hands on and make sure no one else can get any.  It's a zero sum game.  

This makes sense. The GOP is a magnet that's managed to collect just about everybody in our society who 1. wishes they were rich and 2. lacks the fundamental skills needed to actually create value for other people.

[Biff Tannen 45495]

1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

On second thought, I suppose that is a potential reason why the liberal arts are so denigrated these days

Exactly.  People who think critically and know history and can understand the human condition are shat upon.  Everyone should be cogs in the machine and make as much money as they can and then die.