What if the next stimulus check was only for people with incomes less than $100K ? (tax, wages)

[BJfromVA]

I'm curious, Did the last stimulus checks help the economy?

[TimAZ]

Yes, it pumped retail sales and likely prevented some rent defaults. The goal was to inject hot money and try to fill some of the deflationary “hole” cause by the abrupt slowdown of consumption spending in March and April. It somewhat achieved that goal but there is significant damage to the small business sectors of the economy and that will have deflationary effects for months and years to come.

[1insider]

Originally Posted by jonbenson

What if the next stimulus check was only for people with incomes less than $100K or pick another figure.

advantage:
The government would save a lot of money and there would be less debt

disadvantage:
some people 100k and up might feel it was unfair
__________________________________________________ _________

but overall would it be better or worse for the country?

The first check was for people with less than $99,000 so not sure what your question is about. I didn't get a check.

If you made more than these amounts you did not get a check.
Single Filer: $99,000
Joint Filer (no children): $198,000

[Serious Conversation]

The problem is that none of this is adjusted for cost of living or whether or not someone is currently employed.

Someone who made $101,000 in NYC last year and has been out of work since March is in a far worse situation than someone who made $98,000 here in rural Tennessee last year and is currently working.

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by jonbenson

disadvantage:
some people 100k and up might feel it was unfair

You mean single taxpayers? For married filing jointly you'd have to go up to $200k.

Then you also run into the problem of places like NYC and SF where the cost of living is extremely high, and people making $100k are not rich. Why not help those people? (Plus they are very heavily represented in Congress)

[Thatsright19]

Originally Posted by Serious Conversation

The problem is that none of this is adjusted for cost of living or whether or not someone is currently employed.

Someone who made $101,000 in NYC last year and has been out of work since March is in a far worse situation than someone who made $98,000 here in rural Tennessee last year and is currently working.

The $600 per week federal supplement to state unemployment was to address the unemployed. This is a overlapping, but mostly separate stimulus.

And yes col difference is huge, but using tax returns for stimulus is still the best information available. It’s prepared under a standard set of rules and under penalty of perjury.

[2Loud]

Originally Posted by jonbenson

What if the next stimulus check was only for people with incomes less than $100K or pick another figure.


advantage:
The government would save a lot of money and there would be less debt


disadvantage:
some people 100k and up might feel it was unfair

__________________________________________________ _________


but overall would it be better or worse for the country?

You think people that make more then $100k wont need a plumber or go to a restaurant? That plumber and restaurant sure would appreciate the business.

That does not even count that a fixed numerical value of $100k for a cut off is meaningless depending on where you live. $100K means something completely different in the LA area verses Podunk, PA.

[Sand&Salt]

The first one contributed to paying our rent when we were stuck overseas last spring. Covered the 3 months of extra rent. We were thankful and I'm sure our young landlord was too, since everyone else cancelled.

We are supporting the airline industry! And some vacation rental owners.

[ddeemo]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

I did not get a cent of the first stimulus and I'm OK with that. I could have done with the extra $$$ but I consider myself fortunate enough not to need the $$$.

Same here - not a cent from the first and really don't need it but could have used it.

What does concern me is that the basis for getting the stimulus is 2018/9 - not 2020. So someone that made significant amount in 2018 but now is retired gets nothing - should be based on 2020.

[jonbenson]

Originally Posted by 2Loud

You think people that make more then $100k wont need a plumber or go to a restaurant? That plumber and restaurant sure would appreciate the business.

That does not even count that a fixed numerical value of $100k for a cut off is meaningless depending on where you live. $100K means something completely different in the LA area verses Podunk, PA.

whatever figure you like which is high enough to cover any city , it could be $300,000 per household with exceptions for above 3 children

pick any figure you think is reasonable.

The point is people above a certain amount would not get a check