Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2020, 10:23 PM
 
223 posts, read 144,467 times
Reputation: 735

Advertisements

I'm curious, Did the last stimulus checks help the economy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-02-2020, 07:48 AM
 
5,153 posts, read 3,083,950 times
Reputation: 11038
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 08:40 AM
 
8,005 posts, read 7,217,972 times
Reputation: 18170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbenson View Post
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:20 AM
 
Location: TN/NC
35,060 posts, read 31,284,584 times
Reputation: 47519
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
8,070 posts, read 7,432,678 times
Reputation: 16320
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbenson View Post
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)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:33 AM
 
5,907 posts, read 4,429,920 times
Reputation: 13442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:45 AM
 
1,586 posts, read 1,128,951 times
Reputation: 5169
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbenson View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 10:49 AM
 
Location: equator
11,049 posts, read 6,639,868 times
Reputation: 25570
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
6,913 posts, read 3,375,177 times
Reputation: 8629
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ondoner View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2020, 11:49 AM
 
5,450 posts, read 2,717,300 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Loud View Post
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:00 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top