Is the stimulus a government handout?

[rogue06]

Recently I've seen a bunch of left wing political cartoons likening stimulus checks to a government handout or Socialism

5e8fd22411fc2.image.jpgChris-Britt-2.jpg

cjones03222020.jpg
Just three among many examples

But is it really a handout as so many leftists are smugly claiming?

The government has closed down countless businesses (with 60% of them closed permanently and that number is likely to rise), and tens of millions of Americans forced out of their jobs due to the government -- and even those lucky enough to have jobs to go back to have been out of work for up to 9 months. So, when the government is forcing people out of work and causing businesses to permanently close their doors, is getting some of their tax dollars back really a handout or the least the government could do considering they're the ones responsible for it?

[oxmixmudd]

Recently I've seen a bunch of left wing political cartoons likening stimulus checks to a government handout or Socialism

5e8fd22411fc2.image.jpgChris-Britt-2.jpg

cjones03222020.jpg
Just three among many examples

But is it really a handout as so many leftists are smugly claiming?

The government has closed down countless businesses (with 60% of them closed permanently and that number is likely to rise), and tens of millions of Americans forced out of their jobs due to the government -- and even those lucky enough to have jobs to go back to have been out of work for up to 9 months. So, when the government is forcing people out of work and causing businesses to permanently close their doors, is getting some of their tax dollars back really a handout or the least the government could do considering they're the ones responsible for it?

Not sure about the 'so many leftists' part, but in general no, it's not a handout unless they administer it as one. The businesses and employees impacted by government mandated policies to slow the virus spread need support from that same government where possible. The problem would be getting that much money into the hands of those that need it, and not into the pockets of those that have an inside track to a very corrupt administration.

[Thoughtful Monk]

Really unusual times require unusual measures. However in a year or two, these stimulus checks will be used as a justification for guaranteed minimum income (or whatever the phrase is).

[Cow Poke]

There's just no way for the government to target those who truly are in need.

[Ronson]

Recently I've seen a bunch of left wing political cartoons likening stimulus checks to a government handout or Socialism

But is it really a handout as so many leftists are smugly claiming?

Yes and no. One might say that it is money that was originally gleaned from taxpayers and businesses, so it is a refund. But since the government is running a huge deficit, it can't afford it. So it is either borrowing against the future of our kids and grandkids, or it is printing money without proper backing and devaluing US currency.

The government has closed down countless businesses (with 60% of them closed permanently and that number is likely to rise), and tens of millions of Americans forced out of their jobs due to the government -- and even those lucky enough to have jobs to go back to have been out of work for up to 9 months. So, when the government is forcing people out of work and causing businesses to permanently close their doors, is getting some of their tax dollars back really a handout or the least the government could do considering they're the ones responsible for it?

Those are state governments doing that, not the feds. The handout is coming from the feds for the mismanagement of certain states.

[Bill the Cat]

Government handout, possibly. Socialism, no.

[rogue06]

Yes and no. One might say that it is money that was originally gleaned from taxpayers and businesses, so it is a refund. But since the government is running a huge deficit, it can't afford it. So it is either borrowing against the future of our kids and grandkids, or it is printing money without proper backing and devaluing US currency.



Those are state governments doing that, not the feds. The handout is coming from the feds for the mismanagement of certain states.

Considering that nearly 80% of the money spent on the stimulus had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with paying back those who the government's actions directly hurt, I guess the idea of cutting back on spending for nonessential pork barrel programs is out of the question.

[Mountain Man]

Of course it's a government handout, and I'm not under the impression that the MAGA crowd are the ones clamoring for it. The general consensus is that what we need aren't "stimulus" checks but for the government to take its boot off our backs and allow us to go back to earning a living. Who knows when that is going to happen. Already China Joe and Fauci the Fraud are prepping us for indefinite lockdowns, telling us that our "darkest days are ahead of us".

[mossrose]

There's just no way for the government to target those who truly are in need.

Yuh. The Canadian government has spent a trillion dollars on covid "relief", and seniors over 65 got a one-time measly payout of $300.

Now, I don't need that money, nor did I care if I got it. But, I know there are many seniors who think that 300 bucks is slap in the face when other people are getting $2000/month for not being at work.

Qt the same time, businesses in my area first whine (in the past month when numbers have been increasing), that "we need to shut down!".

So, the provincial government finally shut us down about 2 weeks ago, until the middle of January. The same businesses are now screaming "why did you shut us down! We need you to give us more money!"

It really stupid.

[Cow Poke]

Considering that nearly 80% of the money spent on the stimulus had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with paying back those who the government's actions directly hurt, I guess the idea of cutting back on spending for nonessential pork barrel programs is out of the question.

and it's not just "abuse" of the situation - it's gross IN YOUR FACE abuse - cranking out money like it grows on trees.

[oxmixmudd]

Considering that nearly 80% of the money spent on the stimulus had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with paying back those who the government's actions directly hurt, I guess the idea of cutting back on spending for nonessential pork barrel programs is out of the question.

Quantify that please. I'm not seeing 80%. So could you please show how you arrived at that approximation.

[rogue06]

Quantify that please. I'm not seeing 80%. So could you please show how you arrived at that approximation.

If every single person living in the U.S., including infants and small children, got $600 that would be $198,000,000,000 (figuring a population of 330 million). Out of a $900,000,000,000 stimulus that amounts to 22%. So 78% (rounding to 80%) is going to other things. And since not everyone is getting a check that means the figure is going to actually be over 80%.

[oxmixmudd]

If every single person living in the U.S., including infants and small children, got $600 that would be $198,000,000,000 (figuring a population of 330 million). Out of a $900,000,000,000 stimulus that amounts to 22%. So 78% (rounding to 80%) is going to other things. And since not everyone is getting a check that means the figure is going to actually be over 80%.

Giving checks to people is not the only money necessary to keep the economy going. And you classed that 80% as:

" ... nonessential pork barrel programs ..."

So in your view $325B in loans or grants to allow businesses affected by the restrictions required to continue to pay employees is a "nonessential pork barrel program"? Is it not money in employees pockets?

How about the $45B going to do the same thing for transportation - e.g. airlines? Is it a "nonessential pork barrel program" to keep our airlines solvent?

what about the $120 billion in unemployment extensions for those whose employers already folded or layed them off due to the downturn in business? Is that too not also money in the pockets of people impacted by the pandemic?

[Ronson]

Considering that nearly 80% of the money spent on the stimulus had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with paying back those who the government's actions directly hurt, I guess the idea of cutting back on spending for nonessential pork barrel programs is out of the question.

Yes, quite.

A painful lesson may be needed too. When state voters keep installing Leftists in their assemblies, legislatures and governor mansions, they need to feel the repercussions of those decisions. Having the federal government bail them out only subsidizes those rotten political decisions, and so they continue on. So the states with the most severe lockdowns should get the least amount of federal support, IMO.

Like, I wanted to slap Reagan around back in the 80s when he bailed out the S&Ls. Those were high-yield risky investments that people enjoyed until is crashed. It's like going to Las Vegas and making risky bets all over the place, and when I lose all my money I go crying to the mayor to refund my money, and he does. So the people who were wiser and didn't risk their money didn't get bailed out.

[seanD]

More like Federal Reserve handout. US government doesn't have the money and is bankrupt. Whether Federal Reserve actually constitutes government is a matter of debate, as I don't know of any government institution that can do what it wants with impunity and basically has no oversight whatsoever other than what the Fed chair wishes to disclose about their operation and policy to members of the House.