Posted on 12/27/2020 7:23:50 AM PST by Brian Griffin
Perhaps $2000 could be issued for each SSN holder for whom over $1000 in FICA&SE taxes was paid in four quarters within the tax years 2018-2019 who lacked total state unemployment insurance (UI) income in excess of $6000 in the previous UI quarter at least 30 days prior to enactment. If in excess $6000 but less than $14000, the $2000 would be reduced by 25 percent of the excess.
Payment would done by the claimant's state unemployment office at least three federal business days after electronically filing a 1099-DJT for $2000(or lower amount) with the IRS so duplicate payouts under the plan can be prevented.
State unemployment systems typically have more timely information on the income of employed persons than the federal government.
I am fully aware that self-employed persons will lack UI income. Most self-employed persons have suffered economically and those that haven't tend to vote Republican and pay heavy taxes.
In lieu of a check payable to the claimant, a check payable to the claimant's landlord for $2400 (less the income-based adjustment) plus the claimant's amount of a rent waiver received from said landlord, up to $600, for a total of up to $3000 might be issued.
Alternately, a check for $200 more than the (income adjusted) $2000 amount payable to the current mortgagee if the mortgage was recorded before the start of the quarter.
Domestic governments may appropriately require rental/mortgage claimant participation or issue housing, hotel or motel vouchers to prevent claimant homelessness in lieu of issuing a check to a claimant.
This plan is based on the $2000 amount Trump wants, which is greater than the $1200 the Democrats have long clamored for.
To hand out $2000 or even $600 in stimulus money for each child is silly. The PS5s can wait until mommy or daddy earns the money. Ms. Layabout WelfareMom and her offspring have already gotten lots of federal help.
I believe this plan is a good way to reconcile the extravagant promises our politicians have made. This plan has incentives to pay rents and mortgages.
Honor the 10th Amendment and don’t give out the money.
Or money to foreign aid.
Or money to bank bailouts.
Or money to colleges or students.
And so very much more that we should not have ever been federally funding.
Two unlawful expenses do not make a right.
I’m not retired but I do the same thing in my community.
The local merchants love seeing me walk in their doors. All of them, both big and small need customers.
I’m still betting some nitwit in Congress will someday demand to issue every citizen a credit card that Congress can spend on and then the person on the card is personally liable for the debt incurred, to pay it off.
“Such micromanaging IMO is a terrible idea.
“Also, most unemployment offices, along with missing freelancers, the self-employed who lost their companies, etc., take months to process even the smallest of changes or new programs.”
How many fraudulent votes are detected by signature verification?
Well, you ought to not bother with it.
Open the envelope and count the ballot.
KISS
A few simple rules can prevent bad results.
Total non sequitur there, pal.
“Honor the 10th Amendment and don’t give out the money.”
Congress has the power to dispose of the territory and other property of the United States.
Untrue.
The power to spend is linked only to the enumerated powers.
“complicated”
It costs about $3,000 to buy copies of all the regulations that govern Florida residential construction.
Doesn’t matter. Paying by who has debt, of any nature, is a piss-poor way of crashing the national treasury.
Giving a single dime to the illegals is very disturbing.
So blanket $2000 checks for everyone makes more sense to you than debt deferral? I think you misunderstand: there’s a difference between deferral and cancellation. There are millions of people who own their own homes and paid cash for their cars. Do they really need the money as badly as someone who has a mortgage and a car payment. Most people do have those kinds of debt and they could use the help. Those without those debts need less in the short run.
We have bankruptcy courts for a reason.
I would go with one-time cash checks to low-income folks of all types. Those who use debt for more than they could afford? Not so much.
And it is much more often renters who are in desperate straights more than homeowners. Yet, often the landlords to those renters can’t afford simply not getting paid on some sort of “deferral” program.
I suppose you want student loan debt wiped out too.
Yes, I’m with you, though I’d include those looking for work in March 2020 and freelance/gig workers who lost income that is not as easily demonstrated as the regular unemployed.
Definitely not on student loans. My daughter-in-law borrowed $50,000 to go to law school. She made more on her first case that I did the last 6 years I worked. She paid it all back the first year after she finished law school.
Liberals will tell you that everyone in society benefits from a well-educated populace. Perhaps, but a huge chunk of that benefit accrues directly to the student, so I think they should pay every dime back. Also, for me to fund a student majoring in Playground Ethics only to find out they can’t get a job to pay back the loan after graduation sounds like I funded four years of fun for them. Also, I don’t like what universities are teaching these days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.