Instead of giving money, why not suspend debt payments and interest growth?
[deleted]
Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
41–50 of 266 posts
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#42The case for unconditional basic income has never been stronger. Especially with disease precluding work.
I'm curious, in current proposals, would a UBI be limited to citizens only? I'm guessing not, given the "universal" nature of it. If that's the case, I can't say I see support for a UBI gaining wide-spread support, or economic viability, in the US without first securing our boarders. It seems mutually exclusive, given that it would result in an unprecedented flood of economic migrants. I may be misunderstanding the s…
I have never seen a proposal for UBI that is not limited to citizens. You obviously have to draw a line somewhere and obviously you would not give money to tourists. Maybe long term residents could be included though, e.g. those who live 5+
or 10+ years in the country.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#43Economics is an interesting field of study with what seems like endless amount of differing views and such. However, it seems that if you're looking for economic stimulus one of the most sure fire ways / proven ways / agreed upon ways to get bang for the buck is to give poor people money. Poor people will spend it, and you can be pretty dang sure they'll put that money into the economy and quickly. I'm all for it.
The most important aspect of the claim about spending money is the broken window fallacy. Henry Hazlitt wrote a great book on the subject called Economics in One lesson. The simple example is that we can't go around breaking windows to stimulate the economy. Sure, the window manufacturer and the window replacement companies might benefit, however that money which went towards the window could have gone elsewhere. Eng…
The simple example is that we can't go around breaking windows to stimulate the economy. Sure, the window manufacturer and the window replacement companies might benefit, however that money which went towards the window could have gone elsewhere.
You misunderstand. The window is already broken. Everyone would be better off if the windows was fixed, but if the government doesn't help pay for it the window will never get fixed, the glass company goes out of business, the store with the broken windows goes out of business, and everyone gets addicted to meth.
keeping it in their mattress
Apple has $16bn under various mattresses overseas.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only the problem weren't self-reinforcing where existing homeowners have the majority of their net worth tied to their home and thus double down on fighting any policy that would reduce home values.
Is this actually a problem? Why would people want more of their net worth tied up in their home? Wouldn't cheaper homes make the properly ladder game more accessible? Are people leveraging their current home value enough to need it to be higher?
People use their homes as part of their retirement plan - this is doubly so for those of us that expect Social Security to be gone by the time we retire.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#45The case for unconditional basic income has never been stronger. Especially with disease precluding work.
I'm curious, in current proposals, would a UBI be limited to citizens only? I'm guessing not, given the "universal" nature of it. If that's the case, I can't say I see support for a UBI gaining wide-spread support, or economic viability, in the US without first securing our boarders. It seems mutually exclusive, given that it would result in an unprecedented flood of economic migrants. I may be misunderstanding the s…
They would need some sort of registered paperwork to guarantee that some aren’t being double paid. On Wikipedia it mentions legal residents so my guess is it would extend to work visas too possibly
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#46Economics is an interesting field of study with what seems like endless amount of differing views and such. However, it seems that if you're looking for economic stimulus one of the most sure fire ways / proven ways / agreed upon ways to get bang for the buck is to give poor people money. Poor people will spend it, and you can be pretty dang sure they'll put that money into the economy and quickly. I'm all for it.
Yes, because they need food and shelter.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#47https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/suspend-mortgage-p... 3 signatures so far. If the housing market, core to our economy, can be insulated from a crash rebuilding will be significantly easier.
The housing market is in bad shape as-is. Prices falling for housing would be good for a struggling middle class and below. Some states, like California, have policies that distort a free-functioning market. Many cities have artificially constrained housing stock by limiting new development via zoning.
I agree that zoning is a big part of this and would be an easy release valve for people who want to own homes. I'm betting with everyone going work remote as well, cities can be more diffuse when commutes become less important.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#48The case for unconditional basic income has never been stronger. Especially with disease precluding work.
I'm curious, in current proposals, would a UBI be limited to citizens only? I'm guessing not, given the "universal" nature of it. If that's the case, I can't say I see support for a UBI gaining wide-spread support, or economic viability, in the US without first securing our boarders. It seems mutually exclusive, given that it would result in an unprecedented flood of economic migrants. I may be misunderstanding the s…
Andrew Yang’s proposal was targeting UBI at American adults[1] which means citizens.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only the problem weren't self-reinforcing where existing homeowners have the majority of their net worth tied to their home and thus double down on fighting any policy that would reduce home values.
Is this actually a problem? Why would people want more of their net worth tied up in their home? Wouldn't cheaper homes make the properly ladder game more accessible? Are people leveraging their current home value enough to need it to be higher?
You have to account for the "I got mine so screw the next guy down on the ladder" mentality. One of the _real_ cross-party political issues is just how selfish and anti-community most Americans have become.
Re: Giving Americans Money to Offset Coronavirus Impact Gains Support in Congress
#50Hmm. A lot of businesses will get into big trouble over the coming weeks and potentially months. Bars, event organizers, even shopping malls. They're all going to go down to almost zero profit for a while. The problem is if you just give people money right now, they literally can't spend it on those things because they are or will be closed during that time. Money isn't the reason they're not going, Corona is. The mo…
> almost zero profit
Almost zero revenue. Negative profit.