• Current Events, Politics
    & Science

    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • CEPS Moderators: cduggles | Deru | mal3volent
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

US Politics The Heroes Act (US Phase 4 Stimulus Package)

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,906
H.R.6800 - The Heroes Act
116th Congress (2019-2020)


After being passed through the House and stalled in the Senate for over a month, there seems to finally be a more urgent need to find resolution soon. Most GOP Senators were against a second round of stimulus checks, waiting for the unemployment numbers for June (which went down), but shortly after the White House - and Trump himself- said they were in support for a second round of direct stimulus checks. Shortly after, McConnell acknowledged the need but potentially limited the scope to people making less than 40,000 per year. My opinion, this is an easy win for Trump to regain some traction in the polls and with McConnell on board, it seems likely to happen. It's unlikely the final bill will look anything like the current Heroes bill; however, we should be finding out fairly soon just what that may be.

Has anyone been following the bill? What do you think will make it through to the final bill?
 

novaveritas

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
745
H.R.6800 - The Heroes Act
116th Congress (2019-2020)


After being passed through the House and stalled in the Senate for over a month, there seems to finally be a more urgent need to find resolution soon. Most GOP Senators were against a second round of stimulus checks, waiting for the unemployment numbers for June (which went down), but shortly after the White House - and Trump himself- said they were in support for a second round of direct stimulus checks. Shortly after, McConnell acknowledged the need but potentially limited the scope to people making less than 40,000 per year. My opinion, this is an easy win for Trump to regain some traction in the polls and with McConnell on board, it seems likely to happen. It's unlikely the final bill will look anything like the current Heroes bill; however, we should be finding out fairly soon just what that may be.

Has anyone been following the bill? What do you think will make it through to the final bill?
What will make it into the final bill is a bunch of free money for the corporations the grifters the corrupt politicians and their acolytes.
Proles will get some crumbs thrown at them and are expected to be grateful. Some people will take the checks and gamble it on stocks, the insiders will offload the junk onto them, its greater fool theory writ large, Others will hand their stimulus money to rentiers and other insiders. It was looking like the US economy had a problem last year, the greater fools didn't have any money left, so the purpose of stimulus checks is to give the greater fools a check drawn against their own future wealth and pretend it is generous then come up with schemes to suck all that money away from them and give it to the insiders. Welcome to the degenerate system masquerading as capitalism.

The Proles their children and grandchildren will be paying the bill for this bill for many many decades to come.
 

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,906
I'd like to see them come up with a better mechanism to get people to go back to work with this one. $600/week on top of state unemployment benefits was a great way to do the exact opposite in the CAREs Act - that was a lot of money. Someone in my state was getting $1,000 week to stay home on unemployment, a lot making more than they would have had they been working full time. They got the $1,200 (or more depending on dependants) plus $9,600 for federal supplemantal unemployment benefits
 

TheLoveBandit

Co-Owner
Joined
Feb 22, 2000
Messages
34,264
Location
Getting to the point ...
Has anyone been following the bill? What do you think will make it through to the final bill?
I think many aren't paying attention, and may only say 'uh, thanks?' when-if checks are sent out. I understand part of the hesitation also has to do with much of the CAREs Act money goign direct deposit to people who were deceased or whatever, bottom line - a lot off lost money because the mechanism wasn't worked out. I like that it was more direct to the citizens, avoiding middle-gov't taking cuts of it along the way, but as you say the mechanism still needs some work.

In a larger sense, I'm in a poor position to offer a response. I've managed savings, and remained employed, so I don't need it like a lot of others do. Any pushback I'd offer on the concept is pinned to not wanting more gov't debt as opposed to a belief that it is unneeded. I KNOW it is needed by a lot of Americans. There are many who were furloughed if not outright laid off, and many of them won't be brought back anytime soon. But I'd like to see a more intelligently thought thru response, not just quick cash to individual bank accounts, and not large sums to states or local gov'ts. Something that actually gets us back to work and on track to recovery. Stop giving band aids that encourage another handout a few weeks down the road, stop with benefits that far outweigh the rewards of working. IF the gov't will continue to spend, please do so in a way that improves the long term situation and doesn't just kick the can, and have holes leaking cash out to who knows where every step of the way.
 

Xorkoth

🎨 ARTministrator 🎨
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
48,423
Location
In the mountains
I think they should provide people 100% of what they were making, rather than an added $600/week on top of it. I think that encourages people to stay unemployed, as they're making more money (people who made less to begin with). That would be a good start. I definitely think that people unable to get back to work should be given what they would have made, though, for sure. Otherwise we're going to have a massive amount of people facing starvation and likely turning to crime, as they have to feed themselves and their families somehow.
 

Captain.Heroin

Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
93,236
Location
Jianghan Qu, Wuhan Shi, Hubei Sheng, China
But I'd like to see a more intelligently thought thru response
The DJI would be a three or four digit number if we hadn't bailed our asses out in time. This is meant to make the stock market look "promising/recovery possible" so that Trump can lie his way to re-election. It's up to people not to be idiots, but we really do need this second bail out.

I don't know why they don't do bailouts to people who make < $40k or less per year AND who are still not employed full time - if you're full time employed presumably this is less of a necessity, etc.

Alternative; crashing stock markets, devaluation of portfolios, people flock to the bond market/international stock markets/currency speculation to make money.

Instead of disassembling a failed consumerist pattern it's easier just to pour miracle grow on the weeds and let them grow in the spring, wither in the sun, and if they make their way through the covid infested flu season then we can rinse and repeat come next spring. :|

They DO need to make the $600/week unemployment payments as well. I cannot imagine it to be a disincentive to going back to work. 99.9% of people on unemployment want a job with benefits, long term prospects like promotion, etc. to short term payments from the government. Especially for younger Americans who want and desperately need long-term job security and gainful / meaningful employment. The Republicans saying "this is a disincentive to going back to work" are wrong, and are underestimating the pandemic's negative effect on the economy (and quite frankly it sounds like they want to blame people for losing their jobs).
 

Captain.Heroin

Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
93,236
Location
Jianghan Qu, Wuhan Shi, Hubei Sheng, China
I think that encourages people to stay unemployed
Not at all.

Unemployment runs out, and so will the money. Gainful, meaningful, steady full time work would mean A LOT to many Americans.

The notion that people are sitting around enjoying welfare benefits so thoroughly they are discouraged to continue working is quite frankly absurd. It doesn't last forever.

The people who still work may be incensed at others making their full time pay and $600 on top of it; but what's going to happen when unemployment runs out, Trump can't jump start the economy, and jobs don't come rolling back? That money will get spent. It won't last forever. It will get spent. People will be back in square 1, panicked, crying and distressed.

Some of us are concerned with long-term outlook. Making less money now but consistently is better for someone who plans to continue living life. Many people are upset they lost their jobs and are not thrilled about it.
 

Xorkoth

🎨 ARTministrator 🎨
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
48,423
Location
In the mountains
Unemployment will run out slower if people don't get paid a lot more than they were making when they were working. Furthermore, people have their lives set up to be able to subsist on what they were making at work. So paying 100% of what you were making will not screw people over, it will just keep them in the same place as if they were working, which is enough. A good friend of mine can go back to work, but is choosing not to because he makes like twice as much not working with the $600/week benefit. I don't begrudge him doing it since it's an option for him, but it's a good example of the government giving people more money than they would be making causing people to not want to go back to work.
 

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,906
Maybe the mechanism could be $600/week but only up to 100% of pay for last 6 months, in that way, no one has incentive to not go back to work but also makes sure money gets to where it needs to be - with more money left for more people in need. There are, without a doubt, people right now making over twice of their normal pay to stay unemployed.
 

yepyepwoah

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
2,671
I am 35. 6 misdemeanors, 1 felony. Never made more than $11/hr and that was as a dishwasher at abar ( currently unemployed thanxXx to Greg " Traitor" Abbot, and IHOP cook

Iam an anti communist communist Yall.

If they do not pay people like me, after we watched the whole world tanked on Agenda 2021/2030 globalist NWO "scum"...

The uprising soon will tear the entire world asunder

Is Trump a traitor? Maybe

Are tys republicans/democrats moron traitors... Most likely

Is QAnon "real"

Who knows

What I do know is... No more federal payment to the most destitute among us

=

Communist Revolution 3.3

Aka we know...

"They will no longer be able to walk down the streets"
 

yepyepwoah

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
2,671
Why do
Unemployment will run out slower if people don't get paid a lot more than they were making when they were working. Furthermore, people have their lives set up to be able to subsist on what they were making at work. So paying 100% of what you were making will not screw people over, it will just keep them in the same place as if they were working, which is enough. A good friend of mine can go back to work, but is choosing not to because he makes like twice as much not working with the $600/week benefit. I don't begrudge him doing it since it's an option for him, but it's a good example of the government giving people more money than they would be making causing people to not want to go back to work.

Communism will come for you too, brother/comrade...

So examine the bed you lie in before you go lay down...
 

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,906
^ Capitalism tells you that, no one else.
 

TheLoveBandit

Co-Owner
Joined
Feb 22, 2000
Messages
34,264
Location
Getting to the point ...
For those that haven't been on unemployment, most states have an upper limit of what you can get per week. What they give you is based on your paycheck from your last job, then pro-rated within the range that they allow, but there is an absolute upper limit. My personal experience with MD capped it around $400/wk. That is a tremendous motivator to seek employment. Getting an extra $600/wk on top of that? Not so much a motivator.

Of course, the other half of that consideration is ARE there jobs available? Still feels like a lot of the furloughs will become real unemployment without a chance to return. I can see THAT being a reason to extend the benefits, but I don't see that as a sustainable solution. We need some of the gov't helping businesses (I'm not saying the corporate behemoths necessarily, preferably the mom'n'pop operations that were hit hardest) to help them get back on their feet and create opportunities for employment.
 

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,906
What do you suggest, friend?
We'd need a whole new thread about capitalism to adequately answer that one. To keep it within the scope of this thread, I'd simply say someone shouldn't be able to make more money off federal stimulus - and unemployment in particular- than they were able to make had the pandemic never happened. But, we absolutely do need to make sure we get it to the people who need it the most, in the right ways. I could see incentives to go back to work, in addition to current pay, could work, though. As long as the incentive is to get back to work than stay home, is about as simple as I can state it
 

DopeM

☔ Rain Man ☔
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Messages
3,297
For those that haven't been on unemployment, most states have an upper limit of what you can get per week. What they give you is based on your paycheck from your last job, then pro-rated within the range that they allow, but there is an absolute upper limit. My personal experience with MD capped it around $400/wk. That is a tremendous motivator to seek employment. Getting an extra $600/wk on top of that? Not so much a motivator.

Of course, the other half of that consideration is ARE there jobs available? Still feels like a lot of the furloughs will become real unemployment without a chance to return. I can see THAT being a reason to extend the benefits, but I don't see that as a sustainable solution. We need some of the gov't helping businesses (I'm not saying the corporate behemoths necessarily, preferably the mom'n'pop operations that were hit hardest) to help them get back on their feet and create opportunities for employment.
I know my workplace was able to continue it's production at 50% staff.

They aren't bringing back any of the older dudes

They are bringing me back but can only pay me the avg of every employee pay before pandemic. This is less than unemployment + 60p so they told me to take care of my family until the govt let's them pay me more.

While I realize how blessed I am and how shitty this is for so many ppl, I M deeply saddened to go to a grocery store and see some very brave children getting paid min wage, while taking a huge risk to them and their family by going to work so my unemployed ass can make a cake and eat it too.

Equally frustrating is healthcare and front line workers who are t getting any extra,yet here I am getting paid..

I don't see them extending the 600
 

PtahTek

Moderator: NMI
Staff member
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
4,422
Location
Onda Cona
Gettin paid to not work like a fucking squirrel is OK with me.
Knowing it will not last forever, I withdraw and spend it as it comes on what can be used today and the future... generator, firearms, paying off loans and paying for life ins for a year among other things. The money is fake but spends for now... not sure about how it will spend in the future but hardware is useful whenever and sustainable.
Obviously I do not see the future as a bright utopia. Tomorrow we die so lets get on with it, no?
Has anyone been following the bill?
I have not, sir/ma'am.
It is all a game IMO and as a pawn just playing it by ear....
I will accept any/all monies sent and will spend it as wisely as possible.
I would love to get back to work (loosing my mind a bit) but in the US it looks like 1 out of 5 (probably more) are infected with covid. This info is disturbing as IDGAF about me *catching the bug but to get it and pass it on to others is not an option for me.
Sorry to ramble and junk up the thread, just have nowhere else to spout. Can be deleted without and issues.
Love you guys
 
Top