$600 Extended?

Not doing so would be a huge fuck you to the American people

Saw a young guy ranting on the news that the government had no right to cut off "his income". This guy worked at Burger King. Between the Fed and State he was getting $800-900 a week, which was probably at least double his take home pay. The reporter asked him if he had saved any of the money and he said he can't afford to save money. Maybe he caught up on some debt, but you would think he would save something. On the other hand, if you are of the mindset that you cannot save money a windfall would get spent. But hey, it was a stimulus package, right?

Forgot to add he was like 18-19 and still lived at home!

$600 added to the unemployment unilaterally in most cases was a huge mistake for many reasons. It won't be long until many people's benefits will run out if anything extend the states regular on employment

$1200 stimulus check probably did little to help many, either not enough for those who needed it and a gift for those who didn't. Mine is sitting in the bank for a vacation I can't take because of the pandemic

I'm not for big government spending nor people milking the system - but these are unprecedented times - as long as we have shutdowns going on and many businesses unable to fully staff or even staff at all and thus be hiring people, then we gotta bite the bullet till we get past this.

On the $1200 it was better to give to too many than to too few. It would suck to really need it and not qualify. It would have been really hard to administer, but the Fed assistance on unemployment should have just kept people whole on their take home pay. Or, it was just another way to get stimulus money in the economy (as would guess little of it was saved).

Report: Republicans seeking $100 weekly unemployment extension, down from $600:

https://www.wusa9.com/article/…

I think the $600 was a bit too-much b/c it leads to a certain # of people making more in UI than their typical jobs, and works as a disincentive to looking for work or accepting a job similar to what they had b/f - I think a fair compromise would be for the fed to match what the state provides; so if a state provides $300/wk, then have the fed match and also provide $300/wk (up to a certain max since some states actually have pretty-good benefits)

The $600 is taxable. People had an option to have tax withheld. My guess is most did not. It will be interesting if there is a move to forgive the tax on that $600/week as APril 15, 2021 approaches. If not there are going to be millions of people that cannot pay their taxes.

My guess is unemployment benefits will be extended until at least the first week of November...

Until the Tuesday at least :-)

^exactly

^^^ good point - guess right now they are fighting for who gets the credit for extending it?

One of my main points for evening bringing up this topic is (in theory) say clubs start opening up this fall across the country, and the unemployment benefits are extended until November, or the end of the year.... whatever....

Dancer selection will be slim pickings during that time period...

The solution is obviously to start a petition to exclude strippers from getting the $600 weekly UI enhancement.

Its money that is being spent to keep the economy going. Take at least 20 million out of an already ailing consumer economy and see how that goes.

$600 on top of state benefits is not a lot of money. You have to be a sick fuck to believe people should be punished for being unemployed during the pandemic

This is all a red herring, the fight is over who gets credit for doling out cash, both sides want to buy your vote with the cash, neither side wants to do anything real, that would help this country, that would be more work than these government hacks have ever done in their sorry lives.

End the shutdowns. End the payments. We can't afford another trillion dollars in debt.

I think they will try to max unemployment at the person’s former income. They could not do it the first time around because of software limitations in state UI systems. I do think there will be another stimulus payment to people who make less than 40 to 60 thousand as well because the data shows that income level was the hardest hit.

Whatever government is prohibiting your employment should be responsible for supplementing your living expenses.

If it's your state governor, it should come from the state IRS. If it's a county or municipality, it should be paid out of that budget. It's like these mayors who tweet all day that the rioting and looting are fine and they do not want or need federal help, but start crying for a federal disaster declaration as soon as the last fires are put out. If you do not want preventive assistance, you do not get any recovery assistance. In addition, these same mayors who refuse to protect federal buildings or agents should lose those buildings and their revenue and prestige. If having those offices in that area are essential enough to justify the expense (i.e. more important than the cost saving of downsizing), then move to a new city and add a contract clause that the host area will not neglect, malign, or inhibit the daily security and operations of those offices and employees.

No way it's $600 going forward. Saw $400 a MONTH floated.

Another check is likely coming but it's unclear id it will just be for those making under 40k or a bigger range.

Republicans need to figure out their proposal to start negotiating

No more stimulus checks. There are jobs out there and idle people spend their time "protesting" and murdering each other. Ever see one of the filthy rat protesters mention a job? Let them starve. Gridlock for a couple of years will change things.

@DesertScrub - you may want to look up the definition of a political base. You really expose your ignorance when you make comments like the one you just made.

Political bases are solid support. The fight into an election is for the people who aren't part of any base.

@DesertScrub - a bit more reading for your education - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

The GOP bill is taking shape. Money for schools. Money for child care. No stimulus. Much lower unemployment amounts. The goal is to accelerate the transition back to school and work.

Work? Too many letters for the Democratic base to grasp the concept.

If that's true I'm buying more Hertz stock with recent news of them settling $650 million of debt and getting a pause on bankruptcy

I already own 10,000 shares at average cost of 50 cents in my Robin hood account.

I'll just buy another thousand shares

Been selling nice options with these and collecting amazing premiums every month that I use to buy more shares lol

They recovery I'm getting rich

Yolo

@DesertScrub - the only thing you have establish is that you tend to throw temper tantrums when it is obvious to all (even you) that you have been owned.

Go ahead, call me a twat now. It’s easier for you psychologically than admitting that you are wrong (again).

@DesertScrub, though it seems futile, I will try to educate you.

Here is a direct quote from you - the quote that caused me to reply to you:

"The dems have their base
the repubs have their base
they will FIGHT like hell to appease "

Here is the definition of a political base from Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… )
"In politics, the term base refers to a group of voters who almost always support a single party's candidates for elected office. Base voters are very unlikely to vote for the candidate of an opposing party, regardless of the specific views each candidate holds."

OK, now for the futile part - explaining how you misused that big 4 letter word "base"

Politicians don't "fight like hell" for their base. Their base is a given. There is nothing that Trump or Biden could do that could cause their bases to change sides. The worst thing that can possibly happen with a base is that they get demotivated and stay home.

The fight between now and November 3rd isn't over maintaining bases. Its in getting people that aren't part of a base to join your side. That's why swing states get an inordinate amount of attention in elections. If you see either major party dedicating any real amount of resources to a state like California (for example), it's either an act or desperation on the losing side's part. Or a sign of a perceived impending blowout on the winning candidates part.

Thats all nice but were talking about taking away the livelihoods of 31 million Americans and Impoverishing them

With today's dip I got to add ten thousand new shares of Hertz

Very nice dip today

Yep Juicy, by next week Hertz is gonna pay you to buy their stock!

🤣🤣🤣

The $600 a week going to 30 million people is costing the federal government $75 billion a month or almost a trillion dollars a year. With tax receipts dropping by a fourth and outlays increasing the government is running unsustainable deficits. We need to have most people working and paying taxes. This program discourages these people from working since this combined with state benefits pays two thirds of them more than they were making before. The program should at least have a reduction in the amount of the benefits. Now you have people making fifty thousand dollars a year sitting at home doing nothing while others making the same amount or less are out working.

@DocSavage - you are absolutely right, but the Republicans are still going to roll over and acr like Democrats.