Coronavirus (political)

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I would say yes but only to people or households where a job has been loss or furloughed. That money then would work to reduce/eliminate unemployment benefits paid by the state to ease those budgets. Essentially that is the bailout works twofold. It doesn’t make sense to hand out money to people who haven’t been financially impacted...I want my tax money to go to those in need, not just handed out to people who don’t. Also I don’t want my tax money to go to people who just to collect unemployment and not return to work as jobs return either.

Don’t know about you, but even though I don’t “need it” I’d sure as hell spend it. Isn’t that the idea of a stimulus


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

Don’t know about you, but even though I don’t “need it” I’d sure as hell spend it. Isn’t that the idea of a stimulus


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would definitely save it. Chico’s right, there would be serious diminishing returns by giving it to everyone. It should go to the unemployed.

[Giantone]

I find it odd people have a problem with individuals getting stimulus checks to "stimulate the economy" but there wasn't a big out cry when Boeing got 50 billion or the Kennedy Center got 30 million from the last stimulus bill . Like others have said if it is to the "people" fine . I'm retired and have a small pt job but this will cause my heath Insurance to go up(I'll spend it on that) ...I should be able to use this money as I see fit ,save it spend it , what ever.