It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Influential358
I would like to pose the question to you all in general, who is the stimulus for AND who should (in your opinion) get the stimulus.
I had a conversation with someone who hadn't gotten their stimulus recently and they were a little disgruntled about it. This person I know well. They've lived on the government dollar for most of their life. He/she is a recovering addict and has been in shelters, homes, addiction-programs, received SNAP/CA, medical/dental coverage, bus-fare allowance ect
They haven't had a single job, not even a little part time gig carry bags or walking dogs since their addiction rehabilitation almost 12 years ago. Before then, they were a stock broker as a matter of fact, and if you've seen Wolf of Wall Street, that life was pretty common among the brokers..at least here in New York City. Drugs, hookers and fine steaks, but I digress...........
His/her parents, because he/she is not a tax payer or really contributes much to society, claimed them as a dependent on their tax return, thus not allowing this person to receive a stimulus, and has done so for years in the past (normal practice). He/she was upset with the parents because those actions lead to him/her not receiving their stimulus.
His/her argument was that the stimulus check was made for everyone and SPECIFICALLY for people like him/her. In a polite manner, I said that he/she lived in a welfare bubble where they would obviously have this kind of understanding and notion that the stimulus was specifically made for him/her. They lived almost half their life waiting for a check from the government.
I went on to explain the following:
If I have to pay $x,xxx amount of dollars in taxes to pay for the Stimulus Bill, to receive $600, what makes you, a non-tax paying citizen, more entitled, if not equally entitled to the $600 stimulus payment?
I went on to elaborate what a non-tax paying citizen was. In my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong (or if I coined a new term), a non-tax paying citizen would be someone who takes more from the system than what they give back in production (ie taxes like Income Tax, Corporate Tax ect). So in this persons situation, the only taxes they could vouch for is whatever taxes they paid on that $1 candy bar (Sales Tax), as well as some other minor taxes that we all get hit with. But if you take out of the system $5, but only pay into the system .10 cents, your "personal GDP" is in the negative...
Their response would have been predictable, offended. Their argument basically boiled down to the following:
The stimulus was made for people like me to spend and "stimulate" the economy, hence the word stimulus.
So I still pose the greater question to the ATS community...
Who is the stimulus for AND who should (in your opinion) get the stimulus.
Please have a healthy conversation, as we all have different opinions. Lets listen to each other and respect one anothers opinion.
And thank you in advance for contributing. Your insight will be read and appreciated
originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Influential358
The fundamental truth is that there should be no stimulus at all, and there should be no "need" for a stimulus, because the actions taken that have destroyed the economy and people's livelihoods never should have happened.
And even if it were absolutely necessary and proper to shut down businesses and put people out of work, then the government should be directly and proportionately compensating those people -- specifically and exclusively -- for the government's "taking" from their rights and property. It's just one of many checks and balances on government's power, and ensuring it is only exercised when necessary and proper, and ideally only temporarily while the crisis exists.
There is also the matter of state vs federal matters. A sticky widget in itself. The feds didn't shut down the economy and put people out of work. The state governors and health departments did that. It was encouraged and recommended at the Fed level though, so there is that. How much should be on the states and how much should be on the feds? Especially because many states have far more stringent regulations than other states, so the people are not affected to the same degree.
However, if we're just going to hand out checks, then everyone is equally entitled because we're citizens. That's the only criteria at this point apparently. Doesn't matter how much or how little one pays in taxes. If the government's gonna do it, then it must do it for everyone. Equal application of the law.
For those who don't need it, there's nothing stopping them from giving it to someone who does need it. Plenty of people are hurting. Plenty of families are hurting.
originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Influential358
The fundamental truth is that there should be no stimulus at all, and there should be no "need" for a stimulus, because the actions taken that have destroyed the economy and people's livelihoods never should have happened.
And even if it were absolutely necessary and proper to shut down businesses and put people out of work, then the government should be directly and proportionately compensating those people -- specifically and exclusively -- for the government's "taking" from their rights and property. It's just one of many checks and balances on government's power, and ensuring it is only exercised when necessary and proper, and ideally only temporarily while the crisis exists.
There is also the matter of state vs federal matters. A sticky widget in itself. The feds didn't shut down the economy and put people out of work. The state governors and health departments did that. It was encouraged and recommended at the Fed level though, so there is that. How much should be on the states and how much should be on the feds? Especially because many states have far more stringent regulations than other states, so the people are not affected to the same degree.
However, if we're just going to hand out checks, then everyone is equally entitled because we're citizens. That's the only criteria at this point apparently. Doesn't matter how much or how little one pays in taxes. If the government's gonna do it, then it must do it for everyone. Equal application of the law.
For those who don't need it, there's nothing stopping them from giving it to someone who does need it. Plenty of people are hurting. Plenty of families are hurting.
Doesn't matter how much or how little one pays in taxes. If the government's gonna do it, then it must do it for everyone. Equal application of the law.