Senate Republicans eye $75K income threshold for checks

[Warlord]

It won't work but it looks like those earning up to $75k (or $150k joint income) will get a check.



Senate GOP negotiators are eyeing income thresholds of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for couples for the direct payments President Trump has proposed to ease the economic impact of the coronavirus.

Republican senators say they want to model direct payments on the stimulus checks former President George W. Bush sent out in 2008 during the financial crisis. Twelve years ago, the rebates were reduced for individual incomes above $75,000 and joint incomes above $150,000.

GOP lawmakers caution, however, that they haven’t yet finalized the proposal, which remains under negotiation.

“It hasn’t been written up yet, but I think the idea was to follow the formula used in 2008. And those are income thresholds that I think everybody finds acceptable in describin middle-income taxpayers,” said Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.), who has been in the middle of talks for putting together phase three of a stimulus proposal.

Thune said he expects the phase-out to be modeled on the “way they did it” in 2008.

Setting the income threshold at $75,000 per individual would allow the benefit to cover many workers in low- and middle-income jobs who would have trouble covering expenses if they missed work.

Restaurant workers are one sector of the economy that will be hit especially hard by quarantines and state, local and federal guidelines regarding social gatherings.

A second Republican senator familiar with the proposal confirmed negotiators are looking at phasing out direct payments at $75,000 in individual income and $150,000 in joint income.

The lawmaker said one possibility under discussion would be to provide “$1,200 for each adult and maybe $500 for kids.”

“It would be a pretty quick phase-out,” the source said of individuals making more than $75,000.

A third Republican said the total cost of the direct payments would be in the ballpark of $300 billion. That would be less than the Treasury Department’s request for two $1,000 payments for eligible adults, which would cost an estimated $500 billion.

But not all Republicans are on board yet with the idea of direct payments.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said after a lunch meeting Wednesday that the money would be better spent on beefing up unemployment benefits.

“I think it makes sense later, not now. Here’s what people are worried about today: ‘I lost my job.’ The unemployment benefit in South Carolina is $323 a week,” Graham said. “That’s not nearly enough to take care of the needs of most Americans."

“What we’re talking about doing is for the federal government to make up the difference between whatever your unemployment check is at the state level up to 75 percent of your income if you make $80,000,” Graham said.

He added that the unemployment system is “woefully inadequate for the circumstance that we’re under.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said he also would prefer boosting unemployment benefits instead of direct payments, which would also go to people who haven’t lost work because of the crisis.

“I think the best way to help people who are out of work from quarantine and the coronavirus is through unemployment benefits,” he said. “I think it should be related to employment or unemployment.”

“If you’re still employed and doing well, why would we want to send you $1,000? It just seems to me fiscally irresponsible just to send everybody money. The main reason people are not spending money is not because they lack money but because of fear of the virus,” he added.

A Republican senator who requested anonymity to voice concerns about direct payments wasn't in favor of the policy but noted the decision has already been made to include them in phase three of the stimulus package.

“If I was drafting the bill, it would not be in the bill,” the lawmaker said. “I don’t think it’s a terribly effective way to fix” the economy.

But the GOP senator said it’s a moot point.

“It’s in there, and it isn’t coming out,” the senator said.


https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/488332-senate-republicans-eye-75k-income-threshold-for-coronavirus-checks

[oyarde]

Amash is making sure Danke is cut out I see .

[oyarde]

and SC should be ashamed of not having 400 a week unemployment .

[Slave Mentality]

Rand is right. If you are going to hand out stolen money then give it to those who lost their jobs instead of sending everybody a fiat check. Evil and stupid.

[Warlord]

Rand is right. If you are going to hand out stolen money then give it to those who lost their jobs instead of sending everybody a fiat check. Evil and stupid.

Mitch McConnell is now part of Yang's Gang.

A one off benefit to everyone regardless does not make any sense.

Next month they will get more complaints and will no doubt want another check. When does it stop?

[tfurrh]

Modeling it after the 2008 Bush stimulus? Yeah that one really worked well.

[oyarde]

Modeling it after the 2008 Bush stimulus? Yeah that one really worked well.

i think those were around 300.00? Anyway it all gets added to the debt and then you pay interest ?

[Danke]

Amash is making sure Danke is cut out I see .


I need real money, not beads.

[Pauls' Revere]

Mitch McConnell is now part of Yang's Gang.

A one off benefit to everyone regardless does not make any sense.

Next month they will get more complaints and will no doubt want another check. When does it stop?

The first fix is free, your hooked, the rest is gonna cost ya.

[Warlord]

Update:

1240648346236157952

That's going to cost about 1 trillion! Jeeez.

[otherone]

Let them eat cake.

[Voluntarist]

Per registered decision (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?541228-Bryan-does-this-site-reject-traditional-morality-and-Christian-teachings&p=6888638&viewfull=1#post6888638), member has been banned for violating community standards as interpreted by TheTexan (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?33245-TheTexan) (respect his authoritah (https://youtu.be/PaKjRMMU9HI)) as authorized by Brian4Liberty Ruling (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?541228-Bryan-does-this-site-reject-traditional-morality-and-Christian-teachings&p=6888539&viewfull=1#post6888539)

May God have mercy on his atheist, police-hating, non-voting, anarchist soul.

[Brian4Liberty]

Rand gets it. And their ridiculous editorial jab is typical of the manipulative media. Why throw in that comment about “people who haven’t lost work because of the crisis”. Special temporary UI payments could be applied only to people newly laid off during the crisis. Or it could go to everyone currently on UI, it would still be less than giving it to everyone.

Those morons would rather have UBI which goes to everyone. They just had to throw a jab at a reasonable and logical suggestion, because they are big government socialists.


Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said he also would prefer boosting unemployment benefits instead of direct payments, which would also go to people who haven’t lost work because of the crisis.

“I think the best way to help people who are out of work from quarantine and the coronavirus is through unemployment benefits,” he said. “I think it should be related to employment or unemployment.”

“If you’re still employed and doing well, why would we want to send you $1,000? It just seems to me fiscally irresponsible just to send everybody money. The main reason people are not spending money is not because they lack money but because of fear of the virus,” he added.

[Brian4Liberty]

It won't work but it looks like those earning up to $75k (or $150k joint income) will get a check.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/488332-senate-republicans-eye-75k-income-threshold-for-coronavirus-checks

GOP socialists. And Federal, nationwide thresholds are ridiculous. $75k in SF is very different than $75k in West Virginia. Same problem with federal minimum wage. It’s all price fixing anyway.

[Original_Intent]

Update:

1240648346236157952

That's going to cost about 1 trillion! Jeeez.

Not saying it makes it right, but they drop that much into the stock market every few days lately.

As bad as the current crisis is, the day our debt really comes home to roost is gonna be the real deal. And it will happen.

[RonZeplin]

The Senators will arrive at perfect socialism, the R kind.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fthegarrisoncenter.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2FDonaldTrumpSociali st.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Orange Socialist Bad

[RJB]

The Senators will arrive at perfect socialism, the R kind.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fthegarrisoncenter.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2FDonaldTrumpSociali st.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Orange Socialist Bad

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--gSQqFNuf--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/n1k9kccihpxn4ppass3u.jpg

[oyarde]

Against what year of income are those $75k and $150K thresholds evaluated?
- 2018 Income (which can be found in already filed income tax forms)
- 2019 Income (for which forms haven't been filed)
- Projected 2020 income
- YTD 2020 income

I think Mitch's plan lets you choose 2018 or 2019 .

[Madison320]

Rand is right. If you are going to hand out stolen money then give it to those who lost their jobs instead of sending everybody a fiat check. Evil and stupid.

I disagree. I think laws should apply to everyone. No progressive taxation. No bailouts for big business. No discrimination laws that only apply to a business owner, etc.

[Madison320]

Not saying it makes it right, but they drop that much into the stock market every few days lately.

As bad as the current crisis is, the day our debt really comes home to roost is gonna be the real deal. And it will happen.

A trillion here, a trillion there. Pretty soon you're talking about real money!

Actually if you're talking about printing a trillion (which is the only place left to get the money) that's a pretty significant percentage of the total amount of money which is currently at 4.7 trillion and rising fast.

We're going to get double digit inflation, then price controls, then shortages.

[Krugminator2]

I disagree. I think laws should apply to everyone. No progressive taxation. No bailouts for big business. No discrimination laws that only apply to a business owner, etc.


It depends on what you mean by bailout. The government forced people to shutdown their business. The government shutdown the economy. That isn't libertarian or the free market at work. Now it is an eminent domain situation. You break it, you buy it.

They shouldn't give people free money, but they should extend loans for credit worthy borrowers (i.e. companies that were cash flow positive before the crisis) in the industries hardest hit if the private credit market freezes up.

[Madison320]

It depends on what you mean by bailout. The government forced people to shutdown their business. The government shutdown the economy. That isn't libertarian or the free market at work. Now it is an eminent domain situation. You break it, you buy it.

They shouldn't give people free money, but they should extend loans for credit worthy borrowers (i.e. companies that were cash flow positive before the crisis) in the industries hardest hit if the private credit market freezes up.

I think the government should compensate anyone who was shutdown by government force but that's it.

[oyarde]

I need real money, not beads.

Believe it or not we are all out of beads with no plans to make any going into spring planting time . I used to take bitcoin , gold , silver , ammo , guns , finished skins , checks , FRN's in trade but have changed it this month to gold , silver , assault rifles , ammo & FRN's.

[Slave Mentality]

I disagree. I think laws should apply to everyone. No progressive taxation. No bailouts for big business. No discrimination laws that only apply to a business owner, etc.

I believe that NO money should be stolen by gunpoint from one and given to another. Period. I don't care what fancy words and terms they want to use.

I agree with Rand as far as what happens after the money is stolen because I know it's going somewhere. It sucks.

[Warlord]

So Sen. Tim Scott and a bunch of R's are demanding changes to Unemployment insurance:

1242890294057742337
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1242890294057742337

[Warlord]

Bernie wants to place a HOLD on the legislation if the unemployment insurance is changed

1242897480397860865
https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1242897480397860865

[Madison320]

I believe that NO money should be stolen by gunpoint from one and given to another. Period. I don't care what fancy words and terms they want to use.

I agree with Rand as far as what happens after the money is stolen because I know it's going somewhere. It sucks.

I agree money should not be stolen and given to another. That's why I'm against Rand's position.

If you steal mostly from the rich and only give it back to the poor you're taking from one person and giving to another. If you give the stolen money back to everyone it lessens the amount that was forcibly redistributed.

For example if you steal $100 from everyone and then give back $100 to everyone, it's no big deal. But if you steal $100 from everyone and give it back to a select group you've now redistributed it.

[Slave Mentality]

I agree money should not be stolen and given to another. That's why I'm against Rand's position.

If you steal mostly from the rich and only give it back to the poor you're taking from one person and giving to another. If you give the stolen money back to everyone it lessens the amount that was forcibly redistributed.

For example if you steal $100 from everyone and then give back $100 to everyone, it's no big deal. But if you steal $100 from everyone and give it back to a select group you've now redistributed it.

With you on this.

[PAF]

I agree money should not be stolen and given to another. That's why I'm against Rand's position.

If you steal mostly from the rich and only give it back to the poor you're taking from one person and giving to another. If you give the stolen money back to everyone it lessens the amount that was forcibly redistributed.

For example if you steal $100 from everyone and then give back $100 to everyone, it's no big deal. But if you steal $100 from everyone and give it back to a select group you've now redistributed it.



With you on this.


Me too.

[AZJoe]

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/91418251_2777921822436595_1111379030436741120_o.jp g?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=110474&_nc_ohc=AMGiV9qOeKQAX_50CnB&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-1.xx&oh=bca47e996f911c1280dedec802348f33&oe=5EA26723

[Theocrat]

I agree money should not be stolen and given to another. That's why I'm against Rand's position.

If you steal mostly from the rich and only give it back to the poor you're taking from one person and giving to another. If you give the stolen money back to everyone it lessens the amount that was forcibly redistributed.

For example if you steal $100 from everyone and then give back $100 to everyone, it's no big deal. But if you steal $100 from everyone and give it back to a select group you've now redistributed it.


With you on this.


Me too.

I'm against Sen. Rand's position, too, as well as Rep. Amash's.

To answer Madison320, I'm against giving back just the $100 stolen from everyone; I believe the thief would be required to pay back fourfold, which would be $400 to everyone.

[Brian4Liberty]

I agree money should not be stolen and given to another. That's why I'm against Rand's position.
...

Which part of Rand’s position are you against?

Unemployment Insurance is a State level insurance program, with your premiums paid out of your paycheck. If it is properly managed, there should be no additional costs.

Only if a State can not pay out it’s obligations should the Federal government help out, preferably with a loan. If the Federal government demands that States pay out more than usual, then it is on the Federal government to chip in. And Rand would want to make cuts to make up for any new costs.

[Madison320]

Which part of Rand’s position are you against?

Unemployment Insurance is a State level insurance program, with your premiums paid out of your paycheck. If it is probably managed, there should be no additional costs.

Only if a State can not pay out it’s obligations should the Federal government help out, preferably with a loan. If the Federal government demands that States pay out more than usual, then it is on the Federal government to chip in. And Rand would want to make cuts to make up for any new costs.

Only giving stimulus checks to people who make under a certain amount.

[AZJoe]

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/90796578_10157059385389013_6354166375107264512_n.j pg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=ca434c&_nc_ohc=MAJHIRZ1RsQAX_gkwtd&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=ec94391b438d53dbcf12bf4a0d752b09&oe=5EA3A19D