You might get a thousand dollars stimulus package

[FlightlessDuck]

There is no such thing as free money. I suspect you know that. We will pay for it at some point. Either directly or indirectly.

Well, sure.

But you do understand what I mean, right? Like, after the 2008 stimulus, there was something in the 2009 tax form about whether you got that money and then it affected your tax rate.

 

[tinkerhon]

Would my 20 year old college student son get a check? He’s never filed a tax return because he’s never made much but his movie theater closed and he’s out of work now. This would’ve been the first year he filed.

Also how do they get everyone’s info for direct deposit ?

Yes- from all articles I have read - every American adult and child will receive the money - the direct deposit info would come from tax return filings (90% filed last year)
Others would receive paper check -
Both have to fall under the threshold ( reported anywhere from $65-90k

 

[Krandor]

Would my 20 year old college student son get a check? He’s never filed a tax return because he’s never made much but his movie theater closed and he’s out of work now. This would’ve been the first year he filed.

Also how do they get everyone’s info for direct deposit ?

We don't know any of these details yet. This will have to go through congress to get approved and a lot of those wil be decide as the bill works its way through.

 

[tinkerhon]

We don't know any of these details yet. This will have to go through congress to get approved and a lot of those wil be decide as the bill works its way through.

I think the only detail that is a definite (as of today) is that ALL American adults and children would get some amount of money - ( GIVEN THEY FALL UNDER THE CAP) the amounts, the caps, and how soon the mine would be distributed, are all in flux.

 

[Krandor]

I think the only detail that is a definite (as of today) is that ALL American adults and children would get some amount of money - ( GIVEN THEY FALL UNDER THE CAP) the amounts, the caps, and how soon the mine would be distributed, are all in flux.

Everybody under a cap isn't ALL Americans. It is "qualified Americans" and we don't know what the qualifications are yet. That is yet to be decided. And really until it's passed it isn't definite.

 

[tinkerhon]

Everybody under a cap isn't ALL Americans. It is "qualified Americans" and we don't know what the qualifications are yet. That is yet to be decided. And really until it's passed it isn't definite.

Hence why I wrote IF THEY FALL UNDER THE CAP- the cap is one of the qualifications that is still undecided - the amount is still undecided - the release date (obviously, IF approved) is still undecided.

What does not seem to be undecided is that all Americans ( adults and children) -that fall under whatever cap is agreed upon, will receive money.

 

[pryncess527]

The GOP is meeting with Treasury to come to terms before introducing a proposal to the House. Nothing has been decided. A lot has been said.

 

[Krandor]

Hence why I wrote IF THEY FALL UNDER THE CAP- the cap is one of the qualifications that is still undecided - the amount is still undecided - the release date (obviously, IF approved) is still undecided.

What does not seem to be undecided is that all Americans ( adults and children) -that fall under whatever cap is agreed upon, will receive money.

Yes but you still capitlized ALL when "ALL" was not correct and put restrictions in the fine print. Yes it is technically correct but it doesn't give the correct impression.

If I say "ALL Americans will be paid this week on time and you don't have to worry at all (if you have a job)" is technically correct but gives a bad impression.

ALL Americans are not getting the stimulus and it just shouldn't be phrased that way. "American Adults and Children who meet the qualifications will get a check if congress passes the bill" is more accurate.

 

[tinkerhon]

Yes but you still capitlized ALL when "ALL" was not correct and put restrictions in the fine print. Yes it is technically correct but it doesn't give the correct impression.

If I say "ALL Americans will be paid this week on time and you don't have to worry at all (if you have a job)" is technically correct but gives a bad impression.

ALL Americans are not getting the stimulus and it just shouldn't be phrased that way. "American Adults and Children who meet the qualifications will get a check if congress passes the bill" is more accurate.

Ok - let's agree to disagree.
The phrasing seems to be a bit of semantics -
I think what I wrote was pretty clear, but I can certainly understand where you are coming from.
Let's just all hope and pray for life as we knew it asap.

 

[Krandor]

Ok - let's agree to disagree.
The phrasing seems to be a bit of semantics -
I think what I wrote was pretty clear, but I can certainly understand where you are coming from.
Let's just all hope and pray for life as we knew it asap.

Agree on that. I think my main complaint was the capitalizing all to emphasize it. a simple "all americans who meet qualifications" I'd have been fine with. It was the emphasis on all I had an issue with. I don't fit under any of the caps currently proposed but am not above the highest by much so saying "ALL" are getting it when I know I'm not hit a little close to home so I do apologize.

But yeah let's hope this doesn't get as bad as it looks like.

 

[kdonnel]

60% unemployment is practically impossible. They many people out of work would lead to literal anarchy or martial law. The country as we know it would break down or turn into a military state before we could get to 60.

As states mandate that every non essential business closes for 30 days or more, I don't see how in the short term as much as or more then 60% of the work force is not unemployed.

Nevada has defined essential businesses as pharmacies, grocery stores, drug and convenience stores, banks and financial institutions, hardware stores, and gas stations.

Even when you add in healthcare, police, fire, utilities, and limited government, I don't see how that gets to or much past 40%.

At least temporarily restaurants will be allowed to be partially open but I think science will show that there is no economically viable way to handle to go / pickup and guarantee that the virus is not spread.

From the order:
To summarize: I am telling nonessential businesses you have two choices:
1-Find a way to service your customers through delivery, drive through,curbside pickup or front door pickup, or
2-close your doors

 

[smmco]

My prediction is unemployment will hit 60% in the next 4 months.

We are looking at an event that will surpass the Great Depression of 1929.

Small businesses will not survive to be paid back.

Not going to happen. If that's the case we are all dead.

 

[Krandor]

As states mandate that every non essential business closes for 30 days or more, I don't see how in the short term as much as or more then 60% of the work force is not unemployed.

Depends on how you define non-esential and who should close. There are lots of companies who may be "non-essential" but can let workers work from home (I'm in that category). We may be non essential in this situation but us staying open doesn't risk anybody and a lot of our customers are the same. So unless you are a company directly facing with the customer day in and day out is interfacing with customers face to face there is not a need to shut down and there are lots of those.

 

[fsjking]

As states mandate that every non essential business closes for 30 days or more, I don't see how in the short term as much as or more then 60% of the work force is not unemployed.

Nevada has defined essential businesses as pharmacies, grocery stores, drug and convenience stores, banks and financial institutions, hardware stores, and gas stations.

Even when you add in healthcare, police, fire, utilities, and limited government, I don't see how that gets to or much past 40%.

At least temporarily restaurants will be allowed to be partially open but I think science will show that there is no economically viable way to handle to go / pickup and guarantee that the virus is not spread.

From the order:
To summarize: I am telling nonessential businesses you have two choices:
1-Find a way to service your customers through delivery, drive through,curbside pickup or front door pickup, or
2-close your doors

I am speaking more long term/more than a month or so. The PP said 4 months which is not able to really happen. I think we can survive it for a couple weeks. I'm not sure where the breaking point will be, but at some point people will have had enough. If we get to mid-April, unless we are seeing just a massive amount of casualties and a majority of people are just too scared to leave the house, it'll start getting warm and people will start ignoring the orders. Once the public sentiment changes, businesses will start opening back up regardless what the government is saying. At that point, the governors cave or it gets real ugly.

 

[disneychrista]

I think the better thing to do is make sure unemployment benefits don't run out for those who may actually LOSE their jobs because of shut downs.

I feel relatively safe in my job but there are going to be many who may be out of work for 2+ months WITHOUT pay. I'd much rather have them getting benefits then me get $1k.

 

[smmco]

I am speaking more long term/more than a month or so. The PP said 4 months which is not able to really happen. I think we can survive it for a couple weeks. I'm not sure where the breaking point will be, but at some point people will have had enough. If we get to mid-April, unless we are seeing just a massive amount of casualties and a majority of people are just too scared to leave the house, it'll start getting warm and people will start ignoring the orders. Once the public sentiment changes, businesses will start opening back up regardless what the government is saying. At that point, the governors cave or it gets real ugly.

Roughly 3500 people died in China out of a population of more than a billion, and infections are on the decline. Think about that. This is hardly a virus that is going to cause mass casualties or cause 60% unemployment. The only thing hurting the economy is the business closures which hopefully don't last more than two weeks.

 

[fsjking]

Roughly 3500 people died in China out of a population of more than a billion, and infections are on the decline. Think about that. This is hardly a virus that is going to cause mass casualties or cause 60% unemployment. The only thing hurting the economy is the business closures which hopefully don't last more than two weeks.

I've gone on record saying the worst thing that's going to come out of this is the crashed economy. I'm not going to argue about how little the effects of the actual virus is going to have as it's too hot button of a topic.

 

[knewton64]

What are you going to do with it. If it comes?

me I’m going to buy lots and lots of toilet paper. Just kidding.

I got a cruise and wdw coming up later this year. Hopefully. Help me pay for a little bit of it.

Im going to put $200 of it into my checking account to offset the tax liability I will get hit with next year.

Not decided yet on what to do with the other $800.....



T.T.F.N.
&
CHeers Y'ALL

 

[NotUrsula]

Another question...why would it cost so much to give everyone $1000? You file taxes, your refund (or handout as the case may be) gets directly deposited into your account. They have this info, they could just deposit money directly into your account (and, they know the # of dependents if that’s relevant to the package they pass). And, for those without a bank account and aren’t participating directly in a normal fashion (like the homeless) we might be better spending the money on food / medicine / shelter with local authorities that can help them the best. Just a thought.

Your thought apparently skipped right over the unbanked, most of whom are employed or retired/disabled and who lead pretty normal working-class lives. Most estimates put them at at least 5% of the US adult population. Based on current Census estimate, that is ~12.6 million checks, give or take. I know that at my workplace we are told that every check payment costs us about $5 in labor and overhead. Even assuming the Feds can do it for 1/2 that (which I rather strongly doubt) the cost would be at least $24M. You can buy a hell of a lot of masks, gloves, gowns & cotton swabs for that much money.

All that aside, I believe that this administration will insist on actual checks for most everyone, as they will want to get the benefit of the psychological boost of having "real money" fall into your hand when you open the envelope. That feeling is not as visceral when it merely appears on an online bank statement.

 

[Colleen27]

Maybe there hoping the people that don’t need it for necessities will spend it to help avoid mass layoffs. Put the money back in the economy. No it’s not going to help the unemployed, but we do have unemployment assistance.

Spend it where? Stores and restaurants are all closed or closing. Travel is at a near-halt, and only the logistics of closing colleges and resort areas and needing to get people home is reportedly delaying a total grounding of flights. Even Amazon is deprioritizing shipments of non-essential supplies, and if we follow Europe's lead, mail service will soon face disruptions.

My prediction is unemployment will hit 60% in the next 4 months.

We are looking at an event that will surpass the Great Depression of 1929.

Small businesses will not survive to be paid back.

I agree. The flatten the curve message has gotten out, but I'm not sure people are really thinking about what that means for the long haul. The majority of people will eventually get this virus; really, that's the only thing that will eventual contain spread, when most people are immune via exposure or vaccine. The question is whether it happens over a period of a month or two, overwhelming our medical system, or if we can drag it out over a much longer time, sparing the medical system at the expense of the economy. Because slowing the spread doesn't mean we can abandon isolation measures - if we do, exponential growth will resume in the unexposed portion of the population.

There's a report out of the UK that takes a longer view than most of what we're hearing here, and it really isn't encouraging. Twitter thread woth a link and a summary of the findings:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1239975682643357696

If it plays out along these lines, I strongly suspect public opinion will pretty rapidly veer towards taking our chances with the virus rather than endure the social and economic costs of 18+ months of isolation.