Short Term UBI

[harley]

Yep, you got it, it is stupid and yet they should still do it.

You are not seeing the big picture politically. If they just target one segment of the population, it worries the politicians who were elected by another segment (because their segment is getting shafted). In order to have a chance at getting this thing passed, they probably have to give it to everyone even if some don't need it.

I'm pretty sure it's going to be targeted anyway. I never received a check/rebate last time, and if they put any of the same "no millionaires" limitations on this one I won't get it either. We have an income, and that's what they'll probably use to determine who gets what. Now people like PB4 and others that are managing their investments to minimize taxes and such will show up as eligible, even though they don't really need it. But the people he's annoyed about, the high earners that live paycheck to paycheck, probably won't get it, or at least won't get the full amount. All they have to do is apply the same limits they applied the last time.

 

[Fermion]

That is another good point. In our apartment complex, where we are the youngest by 20 years or more, I overheard one couple saying their daughter, who is a hairdresser, is out of work because of the virus. They were discussing the money she sends them (to help with rent or food I guess). This is a 70+ year old couple living in a 560 sq-ft one bedroom apartment in a small town. They are not going to be getting any extra unemployment benefits so the only way they see some relief is something like this non-targeted check.

So what if Bill Gates also gets $1000. He will probably just donate it or forget to cash it.

 

[Montecfo]

Sounds like a bad idea. Already have unemployment, extended unemployment, etc.

I do not see a benefit, I do see abuse and waste. Exactly what we do not need.

 

[Dash man]

We'll take $1k each per month, thank you. If we don't need it we'll distribute it to needier folks.

That’s what we’re going to do.

 

[dd564]

Yep, you got it, it is stupid and yet they should still do it.

You are not seeing the big picture politically. If they just target one segment of the population, it worries the politicians who were elected by another segment (because their segment is getting shafted). In order to have a chance at getting this thing passed, they probably have to give it to everyone even if some don't need it.

Correct.

Also, part of the problem with just deeping the budgets of unemployment is many more people now are working as independent contractors than ever before. For them there is no unemployment insurance.

Food delivery, Uber drivers, etc.


The good thing is cash in the hands of these people will be money spent which is what the economy needs. Money spent on rent, on mortgage payments, on food, toilet paper (evidently). It could prevent some of the nasty chain-reaction events that happen if these people suddenly can't pay rent or mortgages.

 

[dd564]

Sounds like a bad idea. Already have unemployment, extended unemployment, etc.

I do not see a benefit, I do see abuse and waste. Exactly what we do not need.

I don't think you understand the significance of what we are facing.

 

[dd564]

That’s what we’re going to do.

Donating is great, or even going and spending it locally whether it's for someone who painted a painting or some other art.
Or providing overly generous tips or helping a restaurant owner keep his business open.

 

[Fermion]

If we get $1000 each we will use it to pay the contractors putting in the foundation for the house we are going to build ourselves this spring/summer/fall or it will be used to purchase building materials or pay the guy who takes down a few trees that need to go (which will be turned into toilet paper!)

I think we will do our part to keep at least the parts of the economy that can still function, functioning.

 

[Sanstar]

We'll take $1k each per month, thank you. If we don't need it we'll distribute it to needier folks.

Exactly! We will be fine w/o it but we have family who we can pass it on to that are being adversely affected. Not because they are lazy, poor judgement/decisions, etc... but because they do important work that just doesn’t pay well and have kids to feed. Schoolteachers for example.

For those who don’t have family to pass it on to, there are food banks, shelters for homeless, animal shelters, etc that always need help.

Highest form of “trickle down economics”.

 

[GravitySucks]

Think it's a great idea. Let's see how trickle up works for a change.

Probably will give most of mine to DD2.
No one getting their hair done, so they cut her hours.
She missed out on the St. Pat's parade Uber fares. Last year was over $300 driving drunks around for the afternoon. This year less than$100.
Neither of these income streams will be replaced by unemployment.
Maybe buy a couple pizzas from the local pizza pub. That bar income being gone is going to hurt.

 

[CRLLS]

IMO, for this group, it should be spent on "blow-that-dough" or donations wherever possible, not for things that we would have spent it on anyway with other money streams. This way the "gift" will be paid forward.

 

[Aerides]

If DH and I get a check, I'm considering buying something like VTSAX and gifting it to my niece as a a "graduation" gift (I'd rather give her an investment than cash - she's knows we ER'd and what savings means, and I'd be buying at the low, investing in the economy and in a young person at the same time).

She's a great kid, works hard, turns 18 this week (no bday party now), and is seeing her final semester of high school disappear. This should have been a fun experience for her - spring break, prom, grad night (in FL an overnight trip to disney), and graduation itself, then her final summer of fun with friends before they all go to college. All that is probably gone now. So is her part time job - she had a great gig dressing as disney princesses and performing and children's parties. Also gone.

 

[zinger1457]

If they do pass out the $1K check is it likely to be treated as taxable income? My ACA MAGI for 2020 is going to be close to the subsidy limit, this unneeded 'gift' could end up costing me a good chunk of money.

 

[Montecfo]

I don't think you understand the significance of what we are facing.

Candidly, no one knows how bad it will or won't get. But I can easily recognize a bad idea in any case.

And I explained why I think it is. Perhaps you can explain how this is an improvement over unemployment, in your estimation.

Cheers!

 

[ivinsfan]

Exactly! We will be fine w/o it but we have family who we can pass it on to that are being adversely affected. Not because they are lazy, poor judgement/decisions, etc... but because they do important work that just doesn’t pay well and have kids to feed. Schoolteachers for example.

For those who don’t have family to pass it on to, there are food banks, shelters for homeless, animal shelters, etc that always need help.

Highest form of “trickle down economics”.

Teachers pretty sure none are missing paychecks

 

[Amethyst]

When did Bush II give everybody $250.00? As I recall, our tax guy made us tear up the checks so we wouldn't be tempted to cash them. Something to do with our income making us ineligible and possibly incurring a penalty.

Our income is much lower now, but I'd bet the IRS will consider a $1000 stimulus check "regular income" and we'd be responsible at tax time. Still, that is no worse than paying tax on a $1000 payment from Chase for opening a new account...gee, are they still offering that?

 

[pb4uski]

I'm pretty sure it's going to be targeted anyway. I never received a check/rebate last time, and if they put any of the same "no millionaires" limitations on this one I won't get it either. We have an income, and that's what they'll probably use to determine who gets what. Now people like PB4 and others that are managing their investments to minimize taxes and such will show up as eligible, even though they don't really need it. But the people he's annoyed about, the high earners that live paycheck to paycheck, probably won't get it, or at least won't get the full amount. All they have to do is apply the same limits they applied the last time.

What I had heard was not in any way targeted... I hope it is targeted in some way.

Given that the tax return income of a couple converting to the top of the 12% tax bracket is over $100k I tend to doubt that we would get a check... or at least I hope that a couple with over $100k of income isn't getting a check.

ETA: Now that said, I do see that the 2008 stimulus checks that were distributed were targeted to individuals with income less than $75k and couples with income of less than $150k.

 

[pb4uski]

When did Bush II give everybody $250.00? As I recall, our tax guy made us tear up the checks so we wouldn't be tempted to cash them. Something to do with our income making us ineligible and possibly incurring a penalty.

Our income is much lower now, but I'd bet the IRS will consider a $1000 stimulus check "regular income" and we'd be responsible at tax time. Still, that is no worse than paying tax on a $1000 payment from Chase for opening a new account...gee, are they still offering that?

I'm pretty sure that the economic stimulus checks were not taxable income... that would have defeated the purpose.

 

[Aerides]

When did Bush II give everybody $250.00? As I recall, our tax guy made us tear up the checks so we wouldn't be tempted to cash them. Something to do with our income making us ineligible and possibly incurring a penalty.

In summer of 2001, but those checks were defined as tax rebates, as they were sent out basically like early refund based on tax cuts that were implemented retroactive to the start of that year. They were not taxable by the IRS, but may have been subject to taxing in some states.

I guess it remains to be seen what would happen in this case, how it's defined and coded and all that.

But I think your tax guy might have been nutty. If the Gov't sends you a check, pretty sure they can count it as yours, regardless if you cash it or not.

 

[dd564]

Candidly, no one knows how bad it will or won't get. But I can easily recognize a bad idea in any case.

And I explained why I think it is. Perhaps you can explain how this is an improvement over unemployment, in your estimation.

Cheers!

Happily. In this specific case:

1. The amount being proposed recently is far more for families than an unemployment check which is usually around half of what your income was.

2. Contractors who now lost their gig, or are facing decreased income will also get these payment which will help them avoid foreclosure or eviction.

3. In our state alone, yesterday there were over 30,000 applicants for unemployment. I fear the unemployment insurance will be tapped and exhausted quickly so providing these resources with some additional funds to help pay for necessities is good.

In a more general way, there is a lot of information out there in books and on the web about UBI and mental health, education, etc.

 

[Aerides]

**mod hat on**
Let's keep this thread on the topic of the targeted Covid-relief options, and not UBI in general. We've tried that before, as the OP well knows, and we know how that ended.
**

 

[Amethyst]

Now I remember! Because our income was over $150K, he said we weren't entitled to keep the money and would incur a penalty. I didn't realize it was that long ago...almost 20 years.

I

But I think your tax guy might have been nutty. If the Gov't sends you a check, pretty sure they can count it as yours, regardless if you cash it or not.

 

[pb4uski]

Happily. In this specific case:

1. The amount being proposed recently is far more for families than an unemployment check which is usually around half of what your income was.

2. Contractors who now lost their gig, or are facing decreased income will also get these payment which will help them avoid foreclosure or eviction.

3. In our state alone, yesterday there were over 30,000 applicants for unemployment. I fear the unemployment insurance will be tapped and exhausted quickly so providing these resources with some additional funds to help pay for necessities is good.

In a more general way, there is a lot of information out there in books and on the web about UBI and mental health, education, etc.

See... now you're on to something useful. Forget UBI or sending people a check... use that money to make emergency changes to unemployment so more lost income is replaced and expand the scope of unemployment to self-employed people who have seen a drop in income.

 

[harley]

See... now you're on to something useful. Forget UBI or sending people a check... use that money to make emergency changes to unemployment so more lost income is replaced and expand the scope of unemployment to self-employed people who have seen a drop in income.

I'm in favor of that. The only problem is that every level of complexity you add throws in more politics and special interests, and decreases the chance of actually getting anything done. For example, I can't see the taxi companies quietly accepting unemployment bennies being added for Uber drivers. Easier to just drop the money from helicopters.

 

[GTFan]

Sounds like a bad idea. Already have unemployment, extended unemployment, etc.

Except for that large gig economy and all the self-employed that get screwed if it's an unemployment benefit. Basically anyone that is contracted/independent labor is screwed in that scenario.