Posted on 05/12/2020 8:24:04 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
$5,000 Stimulus Check Loan Proposal: The Washington Post reported that senior economic officials at the White House are exploring a polarizing proposal by conservative scholars at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute and Hoover Institution. The scholars, Andrew Biggs (a Forbes contributor) and Joshua Rauh, had published an opinion piece in The Hill outlining their plan, which would provide cash to households, but not in the form of a direct stimulus payment. Instead, the two argue that Congress should offer voluntary loan checks of up to $5,000 – the actual amount is up for debate – in exchange for a delay in receiving their Social Security benefits in retirement by up to three months.
The two describe how individuals who opted to receive the loan would have the balance carried forward at a “specified and favorable government interest rate until the time they choose to claim Social Security,” with the loan then being “repaid out of the very first Social Security checks that individuals would otherwise receive, after which their full Social Security check would be restored.” Biggs and Rauh note that those who choose not to receive a check would keep their Social Security retirement benefits and incur no delay.
~snip~
Democrats and Republicans Debate New Stimulus Checks:
~snip~
Why Is The White House Interested In This Plan?
~snip~
Does This Proposal Thread The Democrat-Republican Needle? Republicans stand to be supportive of this proposal because it would provide aid without fear of adding trillions to the national deficit. Democrats might appreciate the ability of cash-strapped Americans, including the 20 million who lost their jobs in April, to receive more money directly into their bank accounts.
But is this good public policy?
~snip~
Robbing Peter To Pay Paul?
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Good idea? Or not?
Would YOU want $5000 now as a future debit from Social Security income sometime in the future?
Discuss...
I would take it.
Depends on your confidence in the future of Social Security based on how long until you would be eligible for benefits.
You know, there is a saying, “a bird in the hand...”
Feral gubmint now get’s in the business of easy credit loan sharking.
Sounds like a sneaky first step to permenantly shut down ssa to me. But I’m prolly just paranoid.
I would want to do the math and figure out how much 3 months of soc.sec. would be, but considering the system may not be solvent in the future, and the fact that it could be used as an investment now and grow to a number larger than that amount would in social security, I’d seriously consider taking it.
Depends what the interest rate is, vs any current debt.
Yep, I’m still not eligible for full benefits for nearly two decades at which point it will be bankrupt or dismantled anyway
I wish they loan me everything I’ve paid in already, I’d take it in a heartbeat and forgo ever receiving anything in the future
We couldn’t only hope that’s the case
Good answer. I’ll take it. Not sure if I’ll be able to get anything in the future from Social Security.
As far as I can tell the fed gov has never made much of an effort to explain to people that it’s a better idea to adjust your withholdings and keep more of your money during the year instead of letting the government accrue interest for 12 months and mailing a lump sum once a year.
Almost always take the money now instead of later.
Current crossover point for taking SS early vs late is around 80yo, so a lot is dependent on current health and life expectancy. Many seniors are very afraid of outliving their resources and income, others... not so much.
Totally agree with you.
“...individuals who opted to receive the loan would have the balance carried forward at a “specified and favorable government interest rate until the time they choose to claim Social Security...”
I earned a grand total of $10 interest last month on a fair amount of cash in the bank. In other words, interest rates for the Little People are nil — but I’m guessing the interest rate the government imposes on this $5,000 will be far greater.
I like the idea that at least the takers will be on the hook to pay it back but I’ll pass.
Using it as investment seed money is an interesting thought and one I hadn’t thought of.
for nearly two decades at which point it will be bankrupt or dismantled anyway“
None of the projections have Social Security going bankrupt. Under the current finding arrangements - if Congress does nothing, no changes in tax rates or anything else - it is projected to keep going, but with benefits reduced (starting around 2035) by about 25 percent. The benefits would be reduced automatically, but people would get notice in advance
Bad idea. Reopen the economy. The original purpose of the shutdown was to flatten the curve in order to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed. After laying off 30% of the workforce, there is almost no reporting on the current impacts on hospitals, either individually, by city. Where are the reports about the shortages or sufficiency of masks? Are hospitals now equipped for more case?
Where are the overwhelmed hospitals to justify continued shutdown?
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.