McConnell Opposes $1,400 Stimulus Checks Because He Thinks People Could Stop Working

[Arlette]

I would like to give my 1,400 dollars to Mitch. He needs to quit working

 

[Torus34]

I would like to give my 1,400 dollars to Mitch. He needs to quit working

He might better apply it to the fees of the attorneys representing his wife during the investigation of misdeeds during her tenure.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

[Arlette]

He might better apply it to the fees of the attorneys representing his wife during the investigation of misdeeds during her tenure.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

Yeah, I read about that
I just might save my 1,400 bucks until Mitch dies. I would like to take a trip to Kentucky and piss on his grave

 

[calamity]

McConnell Opposes $1,400 Stimulus Checks Because He Thinks People Could Stop Working


Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday explained that he's opposing the $1,400 stimulus checks in President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion economic relief bill due to concerns that the payments could stop Americans from working.

In an interview with Fox News, McConnell predicted that Democrats will unite and soon push the American Rescue Plan through Congress.

"At the end of the day, my guess is they all fall in line and it'll pass, with every single Democrat for it and every single Republican against," he said.

Asked by host Martha MacCallum whether he thinks the $1,400 would prevent "some people from wanting to work," McConnell said that was a concern that informed his position to oppose the direct payments.


"There is a concern about making it more advantageous to stay home rather than going back to work," the Republican leader said. "If we could do it all over again, we—meaning Republicans—may offer an alternative that we think fits the situation. And it's considerably less than $1.9 trillion. Five, maybe $600 billion, which is still an enormous amount of money."

Source


++++++++++++++++++++

Yes I'm sure having one month of rent or less paid out in a check will make everyone stop working. What a clown.

Mitch the hypocrite

Oops: Elaine Chao Caught Pimping Her Family Business with China

The transportation secretary thought it’d be cool to bring family members to government meetings in which they had a financial interest.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[ttwtt78640]

Overall I'd be fine without stimulus checks for everyone if they raised the unemployment checks (Even Trump got everyone $600 a week, and food and rent are not now 1/2 the price they were a year ago), and gave essential workers who showed up everyday during the pandemic, risking their lives (and the lives of their families) to keep the lights on and food on the shelves for the entire country a nice big stimulus check and 4 weeks mandatory vacation to enjoy it. Maybe 3 or 4 grand per worker, with survivorship benefits for any essential worker who died over the last year. The unemployed and essential workers are the ones who really need the stimulus, not people making $100k working from home who haven't had a paycut.

Otherwise if we're just paying everyone, $1,400 was January's number, and we're two months past that, so $2,500 is getting closer. Maybe $2,500 per adult and keep the $1,400 per dependent as a compromise.

I agree that it makes no sense to give a household of 5 with $100K in income an extra $7K because of COVID-19.

 

[Metric Mouse]

I agree that it makes no sense to give a household of 5 with $100K in income an extra $7K because of COVID-19.

You didn't even factor in the increases in child tax credits and other tax changes. I'm making out like a bandit with this bill.

 

[Kushinator]

Wait... does your chart show that food and rent has dropped 50% in the last year? I think you are misreading your chart, because the one you linked does not show a 50% decline in prices...

I misread your statement as though you claimed rent and food prices were down by half.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Heavens forbid people in his poor state had a few hundred extra dollars in their pockets. They might buy their kids some toys or have a fully stocked fridge, maybe pay off some bills. Money which might go to pay other people, with main street jobs, stimulating the economy.

**** that noise. Let em eat cake. The debt matters again.

Woooooooo.

Why not give them a million dollars so they can go stimulate the economy?

 

[Metric Mouse]

I misread your statement as though you claimed rent and food prices were down by half.

No biggie. Didn't mean to jump on your back about it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

McConnell's argument is an old Republican dying argument.

(But I still contend that $15 is a politically determined amount devoid of any economic reasoning. No one can tell me why that is the number we should be going with and that is rather disappointing. By most economic math, application against the common basket of goods and services, and accounting for averages across the nation we end up somewhere in the $21 to $24 range.)

Hmm... that (bolded above) means that a household with two, full-time, entry level (federal MW) workers would have a gross annual income between $87K and $99K. That is considerably above the current annual median household income of about $63K - essentially saying that well over half the country is currently underpaid.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You didn't even factor in the increases in child tax credits and other tax changes. I'm making out like a bandit with this bill.

Yep, and even more goodies if at least one the household is a federal worker.

 

[Torus34]

Yeah, I read about that
I just might save my 1,400 bucks until Mitch dies. I would like to take a trip to Kentucky and piss on his grave

Oof!

Meanwhile, you might try cutting out a picture of him and using it to line the bottom of a bird cage.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Yep, and even more goodies if at least one the household is a federal worker.

Right? I didn't win blackout bingo on that one I guess, so the bill could cater to me a bit more.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Right? I didn't win blackout bingo on that one I guess, so the bill could cater to me a bit more.

Yep, it’s amazing what can be done by congress critters after borrowing about $5,700 for (from?) each of our 330M people.

 

[SheWolf]

McConnell Opposes $1,400 Stimulus Checks Because He Thinks People Could Stop Working


Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday explained that he's opposing the $1,400 stimulus checks in President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion economic relief bill due to concerns that the payments could stop Americans from working.

In an interview with Fox News, McConnell predicted that Democrats will unite and soon push the American Rescue Plan through Congress.

"At the end of the day, my guess is they all fall in line and it'll pass, with every single Democrat for it and every single Republican against," he said.

Asked by host Martha MacCallum whether he thinks the $1,400 would prevent "some people from wanting to work," McConnell said that was a concern that informed his position to oppose the direct payments.


"There is a concern about making it more advantageous to stay home rather than going back to work," the Republican leader said. "If we could do it all over again, we—meaning Republicans—may offer an alternative that we think fits the situation. And it's considerably less than $1.9 trillion. Five, maybe $600 billion, which is still an enormous amount of money."

Source


++++++++++++++++++++

Yes I'm sure having one month of rent or less paid out in a check will make everyone stop working. What a clown.

I can’t believe that idiot won reelection. His state is very poor, which makes this statement more tragic.

A few months ago he said he opposed stimulus the grounds it is “socialism for the rich.”

Mcconnell is a straight up jerk who says anything to not help average Americans. He did get the corporate tax rate for Amazon and other large corporations down to zero. His priorities are obvious.

 

[Kushinator]

A: No, unemployment checks were slashed. Last year there was $600/week benefit, the original bill this year had $400 and they decided to lower that to $300 a week. Crumbs, for the most desperate people who are unemployed and need the most assistance. Awful.

Unemployment compensation was reduced, but it was done so as a means of attracting bipartisan support. Please remember it's not the Democrats that oppose unemployment enhancement and extension.

Already addressed this, but your source does not show a 50% decline in rent and food prices over the past year. I'm not sure why you are arguing that prices have dropped so much when there is clear evidence to the contrary, but if you post a source I'd love to see it.

Your wording was strange and so i read it as though you were claiming a 50% decline. My apologies.

C: Essential workers under his plan would encompass those that :
1: can't work from home/remotely,
2: worked at businesses that did not close at all during any lock down. Firefighters, Emts, Doctors, Police officers, hospital workers, grocery store workers, truck drivers, power plant employees, air traffic controllers, food processing plant employees, garbage collectors, toilet paper manufacturers etc etc. If the bouncer in question was required to show up to every shift because his place of employment was deemed essential and did not have reduced capacity or temporary closures, then sure, cut her a check.

Ok. I don't think this idea would face much, if any, democrat opposition.

D: What's wrong with stimulus checks to the people who literally risked their lives, and the lives of their families, to keep this country running while others sat at home in their sweat pants logging into their work server from their laptop? Does everyone really need the exact same amount of support, no matter their risk or effort or financial situation?

Nothing at all. Again, i believe you're purposefully misrepresenting blame to the level of strawman territory. Again, it's not Democrats that oppose anything you've mentioned.

E: If broad stimulus is so ineffective, why has each relief bill contained broad stimulus to working people? This current bill cuts $1,400 checks to everybody, working or not. It'd be better and cheaper to focus on giving more money to the unemployed and small businesses, reward and stimulate essential workers who worked outside the home during the pandemic and let employed persons enjoy their paychecks and vacation time. Focus the money on where it would do good rather than splash it around at couples making 6 figures with no loss of income.

There are two aspects of stimulus: increasing aggregate demand and boosting consumer confidence. Giving everyone $1400 will have less of an impact on AD than say unemployment stimulus, but the broad stroke will necessarily boost consumer confidence more so on the aggregate than UE extension/enhancement.

F: Survivorship benefits: Let's say any deaths from March 1, 2020 to September 1, 2021. That's when UE benefits run out from this bill, so that seems fair.

Write to your reps. Again, i don't believe dems would oppose this.

F: None of this would replace any other small business programs, health insurance changes, tax law changes etc etc. that are in the current bill. Simply redirect stimulus funds to those that need it most and increase unemployment benefits to the most desperate and most effected people.

IMO, we are talking $3+ trillion with your proposal. And once again... it's not dems who oppose your proposition.

Edit: Sorry for the formatting, I'm on mobile, I apologize if my reply is confusing due to the style I posted it in.

All good.

 

[Kushinator]

Hmm... that (bolded above) means that a household with two, full-time, entry level (federal MW) workers would have a gross annual income between $87K and $99K. That is considerably above the current annual median household income of about $63K - essentially saying that well over half the country is currently underpaid.

Are you familiar with this analysis?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Are you familiar with this analysis?

Yep, and much of that inequality was “funded” by borrowing or printing more money. It seems that the ruling class has decided that taxing the donor class more (at least enough to cover spending during “good times”) is simply unworkable. Congress critters also now know that borrow and spend “budgeting” yields a re-election rate of over 90% (aka is politically successful). If income inequality can’t (wont?) be addressed by establishing A sane tax policy then the next best thing seems to be using unfunded mandates.

 

[Kushinator]

Yep, and much of that inequality was “funded” by borrowing or printing more money. It seems that the ruling class has decided that taxing the donor class more (at least enough to cover spending during “good times”) is simply unworkable. Congress critters also now know that borrow and spend “budgeting” yields a re-election rate of over 90% (aka is politically successful). If income inequality can’t (wont?) be addressed by establishing A sane tax policy then the next best thing seems to be using unfunded mandates.

I don't follow you. Inequality isn't funded by government spending... that's preposterous! The fact of the matter is, compensation structures have allowed higher income individuals to reap the rewards of production.

In reality, government spending has only softened the economic blow of stagnating wages. IMO, you are confusing cause and effect to align with your right-of-center views on political economy.

 

[Ikari]

Yep, and much of that inequality was “funded” by borrowing or printing more money. It seems that the ruling class has decided that taxing the donor class more (at least enough to cover spending during “good times”) is simply unworkable. Congress critters also now know that borrow and spend “budgeting” yields a re-election rate of over 90% (aka is politically successful). If income inequality can’t (wont?) be addressed by establishing A sane tax policy then the next best thing seems to be using unfunded mandates.

No, many laws and rules went into place protecting the top 1% and the distribution of wealth started drastically shifting. Well over half of Americans ARE making far less then they should be and it's because real economic wealth as been declining for most of America since the 70's. Labor is crushed, the fat cats take more and more giving people less and less.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I don't follow you. Inequality isn't funded by government spending... that's preposterous! The fact of the matter is, compensation structures have allowed higher income individuals to reap the rewards of production.

In reality, government spending has only softened the economic blow of stagnating wages. IMO, you are confusing cause and effect to align with your right-of-center views on political economy.

Where do you suppose that “discretionary” federal spending goes?

 

[Kushinator]

Where do you suppose that “discretionary” federal spending goes?

It's a silly claim to make my man. The correct analysis would be, "government spending is juicing corporate profits / stock prices".

 

[Helix]

i think an experiment is in order. let's reduce Moscow McTurtle's salary to one $1,400 check and see if he stops working. oh, and also reduce his savings and investments to resemble one of the people he's worried will retire on $1,400. i'm not a big meanie, though. we won't make him try to retire in his expensive residences on that. we'll put him in a threadbare studio apartment in a reasonably priced area.

 

[kathc22]

I don't think the one time payment will be enough to stop people from working. But the unemployment deal back in the first round did. I had staff walk out of my nursing home and get unemployment. They had jobs but preferred to stay at home and get paid. The area I live in is not exactly the most motivated in working. My question is why people already getting benefits (i.e. food stamps/welfare) get a check? I watched one man blow the whole amount up his nose.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Wait... does your chart show that food and rent has dropped 50% in the last year? I think you are misreading your chart, because the one you linked does not show a 50% decline in prices...

That is changing quickly as expected. Prices are going up and will continue to. That you can bet money on.