I do not support giving every american $1000

[garybeck]

i do not think such an action would spark the economy.

We are not going to get through this by buying more TVs and cars.

I personally still have a job. I would love to have an extra $1000 in my pocket now but to be honest, the people who are losing their jobs need it more than I do.

I like what France is doing, suspending rent and utility payments.

I like the idea of targeting benefits to people who have lost their job. Expand unemployment benefits. give cash to people have lost their jobs or even hourly workers who are temporarily out of work.

Don't give $1000 to people who still have work.
Don't give $1000 to rich folks.
Target the money where it is needed most.

and you can start with the basics. make lots more test kits. make sure they are free. make lots more ventilators.

thats my 2 cents.

[genxlib]

1. I agree with you

It is overly simplistic and not targeted enough to help the people who need the help the most.

[Sugar Smack]

2. The checks themselves will probably be crawling with death.

I have Stephen King to thank for that image.

[FiveGoodMen]

13. Smallpox?

[Sugar Smack]

17. No. Captain Tripps.

Or if you like, Coronavirus. And by the time they send the checks out they'll be radioactive. But my own guess is that by "sending them to many Americans", trump meant "not a one".

[FiveGoodMen]

21. Sending people 'gifts' that spread disease reminded me of our historical use of blankets.

[handmade34]

40. ...

"Beware of Grifters bearing gifts"

[Shrike47]

30. I think the little checks to people are a cover for the big checks to corporations.

[emmaverybo]

3. Agree to targeting and relieving debt, rent, prop tax, mortgage, utility and other payments

through suspending or vouchers. Expand unemployment. Pay monthly to all out of work who are gig, independent, hourly, self-employed, temp workers.

Problem will be for undocumented and documented working under table.

[Mosby]

32. And they won't get checks because they aren't on any list.

Because they don't pay into social security and the underground employers don't pay payroll tax.

[Totally Tunsie]

4. "people who still have work" will change by the day.

What's true today is not necessarily true tomorrow.

[garybeck]

9. of course. so when someone loses their job, THEN you send them a check or

whatever support can help them get through

why send $1000 to someone who doesn't need it?

[babylonsister]

10. The logistics of this are unimaginable.

I don't think it's doable.

[tblue37]

5. But a lot of people need the money to buy food, not big screen TVs. nt

[gratuitous]

12. Study after study shows

Folks who need a cash infusion for basic necessities spend it on those necessities. They are usually really good bargain hunters, and make wise purchases.

My only concern with handing out money is how it will be treated by the IRS. Everyone was really happy years ago when the Bush administration sent out those $300 checks. Happy, that is, until they found out the next tax day that that money was an advanced on a presumed tax refund. If you were used to getting $500 back* and only got $200, it was a nasty little surprise. Even worse was penciling out a $200 refund only to find that you owed money. Is this money going to be treated as income, a debit against taxes owed, or something else?

*And yes, we all know that the very best policy is to set your withholding so that you come out as close to zero owed or refunded as possible, but as irrational as people are, they still like getting a tidy little lump sum check at tax time.

[rockfordfile]

25. Not everybody needs it. It should be targeted. Pelosi is correct.

Trying to just give money to everybody shows trump is desperate. It's a way to buy votes. Corruption.

[Amishman]

6. working people need it too

My wife and I still have our main jobs, though her hours are cut.

However we have lost our side incomes and currently have a large debt load.

Working people need direct assistance, as do small businesses.

We need to not be cheap and not be selective.

[BusyBeingBest]

7. Consider that many people THINK they have a job...until

a few weeks go by...and things really start shutting down indefinitely, and contracts get canceled, and factories shut down, and suppliers can't supply. I'll take the money, thanks.

[Yavin4]

16. Thank you.

It amazes me that some people think that you can shut down the global economy for a month or more, have soaring unemployment here in the US, and everything will just be fine.

Businesses will be aggressively cost cutting for the next 2 to 3 years at the least.

[John Fante]

8. Los Angeles County has placed a moritorium on evictions through May 31st

but if you miss a payment, they still expect you to pay it within 6 months of the moritorium ending. That's absurd. People aren't drowning in enough debt apparently.

[durablend]

23. That's going to be the case in a lot of areas

Landlords are going to want X * number of months rent right when the moratorium is over with or else they'll be right down to city hall with the eviction papers. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.

[USALiberal]

24. I am sure many landlords have expenses also! nt

[DBoon]

26. landlords can negotiate with their creditors.

Renters end up living on the streets.

[John Fante]

29. On top of that, they'll be receiving assistance from the state and

federal governments. They'll be fine. Renters, not so much.

[VarryOn]

11. I assume you'll be able to donate the money...

and deduct when you itemize.

[wcmagumba]

14. Seems like any payouts to individuals...

should provide relief to those in need and also stimulate the economy. I have read that each dollar put into the
economy through spending on needed goods and services actually (in normal times anyway) adds an estimated 2 to 3 times that much to the overall economy.

[Yavin4]

15. Sorry, but you could not be more wrong.

To overcome the devastation that this virus has already wreaked, businesses, state and local governments will be aggressively cutting costs for the next 2-3 years in order to return to profitability and/or balance their budgets. That's going to create a cascading affect of consumers cutting costs as well.

When everyone is cutting costs all at the same time, you get an economic depression or deflation. That's where everything spirals out of control. To offset this, the federal government has to spend money to stem the tide of cascading cost cutting and help restore consumer confidence as soon as possible.

The government should send out monthly stipends to consumers, block grants to states to slow down cost cutting, and tax cuts/zero intrest loans to businesses big and small to slow down layoffs.

Your way is not only economically negligent and horrid, but it also leads to a rise of authoritarianism.

[Initech]

18. I am actually getting to the point where I'm going to need a new car.

Mine already has 92K miles on it and is requiring some very expensive repairs. That $1,000 will go a long way to making a down payment for me.

[Mosby]

33. That sucks, what kind of car is it?

[Initech]

35. It's a Nissan Altima.

2012 model. Already 8 years old. I had been looking prior to the Great Quarantine and afterward I will continue to resume. I was thinking by June I will be applying for loans and that sort of thing.

I just hope that things will get better in the next few weeks and not worse like they are predicting.

[hedda_foil]

19. Well that's probably a good thing, Gary, as the truth is the pig is being talked out of them now.

So breathe easy Mr. Beck. You won't have to worry about catching the virus from those dirty government checks. Nosireebob!

[customerserviceguy]

20. I'm with you

Trump's just trying to buy people off on the credit card.

Crumbs for us, while his business buddies get billions.

[rockfordfile]

22. I agree

[LakeArenal]

27. I match your two cents with four cents.

[Rorey]

28. In reference to suspending rent and utility payments

In France, are the landlords getting paid by the government.

I'm a landlord, and it's not for fun. It's how I pay my own bills. I know I'm going to take a hit this month, but I'm hoping those hits won't be forever.

[MFM008]

31. If i had the 1000

I get food and supplies.
Now where to find them............

[Happy Hoosier]

34. Don't complicate this...

This isn’t about stimulating the economy. It’s about avoiding cascading failures. People who have jobs now, might not tomorrow. Adding layers of checks and qualifications, and means testing is just going to delay this, and inevitability delay getting help out. And it needs to get out yesterday. I trust Austin Goolsbee who said it needs to be substantial, go to everyone, and above all, FAST.

[MoonlitKnight]

38. Yes

We can take it back from those who didn’t need it on the back end.

[Happy Hoosier]

41. Don't even bother.

Almost everyone will experience a large impact from this. If someone gets it and doesn’t deserve it? Not the wnd of the world for a deal like this. Speed and breadth are what is important here.

[Doodley]

36. Agree with OP, but I'd also add that as important is to get everyone tested. When we can

identify everyone who has the virus and quarantine those people, we can defeat this epidemic within a few weeks and end the financial misery as well.

[procon]

37. Isn't the goal to get a lot of money back into

the economy as fast as possible? Other than the moral objections, it's not so much a concern as to who gets these cash allotments, what matters is that most recipients will go out and spend it in their communities.

The whole purpose of a stimulus is to stimulate the economy to keep us out of another Recession or the worst possibility of a Second Great Depression. If that happens under Trump's rule, we are all doomed to a decade of unimaginable losses.

So hand out the money to as many Americans as possible. Whether it's the single mom scraping by on her minimum wage job at a fast food joint, or the affluent couple in their swanky McMansion, it will all get spent, and that is the goal.

[Happy Hoosier]

42. It's more of a life preserver than a stimulus.

The point is to avoid utter collapse by helping people make essential purchases.

[MLAA]

39. Works for me

[handmade34]

43. no easy answers

and fear a lot of people who need the help won't get it...

[DrToast]

44. You don't understand what its for

It's not supposed to stimulate the economy. It's to prevent a depression.

People are going to use it to pay their rent, not buy a TV.

[librechik]

45. with a thousand dollars I can pay half my mortgage

and still be short a couple hundred. Can we get some serious minded sociologists into this discussion? How many families know how to manage that amount of money and make it last? This is as ridiculous as claiming $15 is a living wage. No one in any county can support themselves on that amount in the US, not for years!

[MineralMan]

47. With $1000, I can pay my mortgage, my car payment and buy

Two weeks of groceries. We all have different situations.

[Happy Hoosier]

46. the risk here is not...

That some people who don’t need it do, but that people who do need it get too little too lateor even none at all.

Way too many people have no idea that this crisis is and will be like none other. We need bold action NOW.

[brush]

48. Takes too long to figure all that out.

Millions are or will be soon out of work and need it now. Give it to everyone asap.

[mvd]

49. I agree with you

Ideally it would go to people who make less than $100,000 a year. But these are scary times for all. Definitely should not be tied to work as for many, that is not an option right now. It does need to be supplemented with other important things like paid sick leave, unemployment insurance, foreclosure halting, testing and more.