A second stimulus check? Here's how much money you could get....

[PopsnTuff]

By now, most Americans have received the federal stimulus checks directed by the CARES Act in March to help consumers weather the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

Three months later, the downturn has been declared an official recession and the official unemployment rate has soared into double digits, heightening calls for a second round of stimulus checks.

There's good news and bad news on the prospects for additional government assistance. The proposed $3 trillion Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions, or HEROES, Act would authorize another round of stimulus payments for most U.S. households. While the bill was passed by the Democrat-controlled House last month, it still must get through the Republican-controlled Senate.

The HEROES Act offers a larger stimulus payment than the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act. Under the new legislation each member of a household would receive $1,200, including children. The income thresholds would remain the same, meaning that single taxpayers earning less than $75,000 and married taxpayers earning a total of $150,000 would receive the full payments. For instance, a family of four whose parents earn less than $150,000 would receive $4,800.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/second-stimulus-check-round-2-how-much-money-will-you-get/

 

[jerry old]

Great, another stimulus check.
Whoa, whose money is that ; who is going to pay for it?

 

[Aneeda72]

By now, most Americans have received the federal stimulus checks directed by the CARES Act in March to help consumers weather the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

Three months later, the downturn has been declared an official recession and the official unemployment rate has soared into double digits, heightening calls for a second round of stimulus checks.

There's good news and bad news on the prospects for additional government assistance. The proposed $3 trillion Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions, or HEROES, Act would authorize another round of stimulus payments for most U.S. households. While the bill was passed by the Democrat-controlled House last month, it still must get through the Republican-controlled Senate.

The HEROES Act offers a larger stimulus payment than the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act. Under the new legislation each member of a household would receive $1,200, including children. The income thresholds would remain the same, meaning that single taxpayers earning less than $75,000 and married taxpayers earning a total of $150,000 would receive the full payments. For instance, a family of four whose parents earn less than $150,000 would receive $4,800.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/second-stimulus-check-round-2-how-much-money-will-you-get/

Hmm, how can I get four children really fast?

 

[Knight]

Great, another stimulus check.
Whoa, whose money is that ; who is going to pay for it?

Great question. So many look at stimulus as free money but of course it isn't. Maybe a better question would be what form or forms will taxes take to pay for stimulus money?

 

[Knight]

Hmm, how can I get four children really fast?

Adopt "on paper" some of those illegals from south of the border.

 

[Ruthanne]

Great, another stimulus check.
Whoa, whose money is that ; who is going to pay for it?

Who cares?

 

[Ruthanne]

I'd like mine and direct deposit please and soon.

 

[Don M.]

Great, another stimulus check. Whoa, whose money is that ; who is going to pay for it?

That money will be paid back....many times over....when "reality" catches up with the fiscal irresponsibility in Washington....and it will be the average person who pays the highest price.

 

[Knight]

That money will be paid back....many times over....when "reality" catches up with the fiscal irresponsibility in Washington....and it will be the average person who pays the highest price.

Taxes in some form will be the only way. I wonder how many got the $1200.00 & will get another $1200.00 if approved that don't pay federal taxes. IMO a VAT would be the fairest way.

 

[Don M.]

Taxes in some form will be the only way. I wonder how many got the $1200.00 & will get another $1200.00 if approved that don't pay federal taxes. IMO a VAT would be the fairest way.

Yes, a VAT may be the ONLY way this government can reduce its ever increasing Debt. The vast majority of nations have a VAT....most in the range of 12 to 15 percent. However, given the number of people who think the government owes them a living, and the howling most do at the slightest hit about raising taxes, the odds of seeing any fiscal responsibility in this nation is somewhere between slim and none. Can you imagine the outcry if suddenly every consumer product went up 15%????

 

[AmberTea]

direct deposit works for me.

 

[Knight]

Yes, a VAT may be the ONLY way this government can reduce its ever increasing Debt. The vast majority of nations have a VAT....most in the range of 12 to 15 percent. However, given the number of people who think the government owes them a living, and the howling most do at the slightest hit about raising taxes, the odds of seeing any fiscal responsibility in this nation is somewhere between slim and none. Can you imagine the outcry if suddenly every consumer product went up 15%????

Sadly I can imagine it that is why I think the middle class will foot the bill for the increasing debt & deficit. Slow recovery from this disaster IMO will compound the cost of politicians unwillingness to deal with what is to come.

 

[StarSong]

Yes, a VAT may be the ONLY way this government can reduce its ever increasing Debt. The vast majority of nations have a VAT....most in the range of 12 to 15 percent. However, given the number of people who think the government owes them a living, and the howling most do at the slightest hit about raising taxes, the odds of seeing any fiscal responsibility in this nation is somewhere between slim and none. Can you imagine the outcry if suddenly every consumer product went up 15%????

VATs are dreadfully regressive - they hit hardest those who can afford it the least. Income taxes that scale up are the fairest, however I'd add that passive income from stocks and other investments should be taxed at as high or higher than earned income.

 

[hellomimi]

I weep for this generation who will definitely pay for all these.

 

[Manatee]

That is a sure way to cause inflation which sticks it the old folks who are living on fixed income.

 

[911]

We (U.S. Taxpayers) are at a place now that paying down the national debt is all but impossible.

 

[Knight]

VATs are dreadfully regressive - they hit hardest those who can afford it the least. Income taxes that scale up are the fairest, however I'd add that passive income from stocks and other investments should be taxed at as high or higher than earned income.

Is it reasonable to think that taxing passive income from stocks and other investments would reduce that form of trying to improve ones retirement income would drop away or be reduced quite a bit to keep from paying those higher taxes?

I think human nature kicks in to the extent that the thinking why should I strive to invest for my future when those that don't or can't will fare better than me.? Why should I bust my butt to excel & provide better for myself or family when those that don't or can't will? Try to think of this in the context of human nature of not to be taken advantage of.

A VAT hits all equally . The only difference IMO those that receive government help in any form also contribute to the paying for the cost to support their needs.

I think it's common knowledge that people find loopholes to beat the system. The caveat to the VAT would be to exempt them from VAT. Then to be able to identify & continually monitor those individuals that have no way to support themselves & have to depend on society for their lives & well being.

 

[Knight]

We (U.S. Taxpayers) are at a place now that paying down the national debt is all but impossible.

It boggles the mind to think about just the interest paid on the debt. And therefore the increasing deficit.

 

[Aunt Bea]

IMO recent events have proven that the United States can do anything if the issue becomes a national priority and paying down the national debt is simply not a priority.

It's interesting to look at the Debt Clock for our country compared to others, for each state and going back to different points in time using the tabs at the top of the screen.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html

 

[StarSong]

A VAT hits all equally . The only difference IMO those that receive government help in any form also contribute to the paying for the cost to support their needs.

I think it's common knowledge that people find loopholes to beat the system. The caveat to the VAT would be to exempt them from VAT. Then to be able to identify & continually monitor those individuals that have no way to support themselves & have to depend on society for their lives & well being.

VAT hits people on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder the hardest. They spend a much higher percentage (often 100%) of their income to stay afloat, so percentage-wise far more of their dollars would go to VAT.

Relative to income and assets, VAT is enormously regressive.

I believe that income derived from working should be taxed at a lower level than income derived from investments. The reason it's not is because the wealthy make the rules in this country.

 

[Knight]

VAT hits people on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder the hardest. They spend a much higher percentage (often 100%) of their income to stay afloat, so percentage-wise far more of their dollars would go to VAT.

Relative to income and assets, VAT is enormously regressive.

I believe that income derived from working should be taxed at a lower level than income derived from investments. The reason it's not is because the wealthy make the rules in this country.

What would be the incentive to invest? What do you think would the result of not investing? As I mentioned in my previous post human nature is something that has to be taken into consideration when looking for fairness for everyone.

 

[StarSong]

What would be the incentive to invest? What do you think would the result of not investing? As I mentioned in my previous post human nature is something that has to be taken into consideration when looking for fairness for everyone.

The incentive to invest would be to gain a profit from that investment, not to gain a tax reduction on those profits. Passive earnings shouldn't be prized over the fruits of one's labor - at least not in my opinion. At the very least the tax rate should be the same for all types of income.