11–20 of 21 posts
“Qualifying residents.” This is vote-buying with other people’s money, not legitimate public policy. No one believes this is a solution to anything, except maybe holding some seats while the Saudis snuff the SPR illusion.
Can someone explain to me how printing more money and handing it to consumers is combatting inflation?
1. This isn't printing money. 2. Even if it was printing money, the mechanism by which printing money causes inflation is by making the currency weaker relative to other currencies. The US dollar is stronger than ever, so "printing money" has nothing to do with the inflation we're facing right now. 3. Giving people money can absolutely help combat inflation because it means people can pay for the food/gas/energy that…
“Qualifying residents.” This is vote-buying with other people’s money, not legitimate public policy. No one believes this is a solution to anything, except maybe holding some seats while the Saudis snuff the SPR illusion.
Other people how? For many it's just a refund on state income taxes.
That's why he was ok with giving one-off $1000 checks based on income (which is probably mostly redistributed cap gains revenue), while also veto'ing relatively cheap improvements to the education system due to their cost. I'd imagine that a $1000 check also goes over better with voters than kindergarten for everyone or improved mental health resources in schools.
In general lower income people spend a higher proportion of their money than people who are ineligible for the $1000 checks, so I can see how it might possibly still drive inflation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Other people how? For many it's just a refund on state income taxes.
My understanding is that it causes legal issues for the state when the budget surplus is too high (they legally have to spend more or reduce taxes). The current surplus is sort of a windfall due to people taking capital gains (which CA taxes as regular income), and Newsom doesn't think that's sustainable in the future. That's why he was ok with giving one-off $1000 checks based on income (which is probably mostly red…
Actually, I don't think the effect will be big enough to notice, except that I bet there'll be loud and targeted offers for poor people with a lack of judgement: "$1,000 plus a trade-in will get you a new car!" "Click here to invest your $1,000 windfall in BitCoin!"
Can someone explain to me how printing more money and handing it to consumers is combatting inflation?
While it may not seem like much, $1000 is absolutely a lot to those struggling the most right now. Those who are seeing their rent increase, the cost of food further limiting their already meager choices, and for whom buying even a used car is now out of reach.
You don't have to agree with the premise, scope or cost/benefit of this plan but this is the rationale that I see behind it.
Most of us here are fortunate enough to not be seriously impacted except for specific high-cost items like vehicles or housing, but even there the poor are disproportionately affected in terms of the percentage of their monthly budget lost to inflation on non-discretionary spending. While it may not seem like much, $1000 is absolutely a lot to those struggling the most right now. Those who are seeing their rent incre…
If the economy shrinks by 5% b/c of inflation will you advocate for 4k checks?
Can someone explain to me how printing more money and handing it to consumers is combatting inflation?
Not sure this qualifies as printing money, CA cannot issue currency, they will be spending from their budget which is tax payer funded no? Is giving back money going to increase inflation? not sure how much of an impact a $1k payment will have on overall inflation. I would guess a lot less than the existing outside factors including the war in Ukraine and the impact of covid disruption and relief.
Also, you are trying hard to brush aside the actions taken by the current government that have fueled this (taking numerous actions to limit domestic fuel production in the name of environmentalism, 8 trillion in debt)…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that it causes legal issues for the state when the budget surplus is too high (they legally have to spend more or reduce taxes). The current surplus is sort of a windfall due to people taking capital gains (which CA taxes as regular income), and Newsom doesn't think that's sustainable in the future. That's why he was ok with giving one-off $1000 checks based on income (which is probably mostly red…
And It would drive inflation in those products that lower-income people in particular purchase. Actually, I don't think the effect will be big enough to notice, except that I bet there'll be loud and targeted offers for poor people with a lack of judgement: "$1,000 plus a trade-in will get you a new car!" "Click here to invest your $1,000 windfall in BitCoin!"