The House is moving forward with a COVID-19 relief package without lowering the income threshold of eligibility for the $1,400 direct checks, which had been a large point of disagreement between moderate Democrats and progressives.
Every time the word āprogressiveā is used they slap a picture of AOC over the headline. It was Pramila Jayapal that did the most heavy lifting to make this happen, yet I guess it doesnāt generate the number of clicks.
The absolute most efficient use of donations, as 100% of proceeds actually go to the intended cause, unlike most ācharitiesā, where the bosses use revenue as a personal slush fund and to give themselves lavish paychecks.
I will refrain from celebrating until we see the bill language in the Senate. Hopefully, Sanderās argument will get through to the moderate Dems there too.
āIn other words, working class people who got checks from Trump would not get them from Biden. Brilliant!ā Sanders tweeted.
The move marks a victory for progressives as moderate Democrats had proposed lowering the cap to $50,000 for individual filersā¦
I really donāt understand what āmoderateā means in this context.
As Josh pointed out in an editorial of the last couple of days, reducing the cutoff for full funding would be the kiss of death in upcoming elections.
So, whatās āmoderate:ā moderately tired of being office holders or of not being Republicans? Or, is about just being in the majority?
Josh wrote about this and was absolutely right. Another win for the Dems. We donāt need the money at this point and are going to put the whole amount right back into the economy by donating to the food bank, Habitat for Humanity, and buying from small businesses. The entire amount of your donation to HH goes into putting people into houses, they pay their administrative costs from profits from their Restores.
So do we know where this number comes from? Is it still 2019 AGI? Because if so, things have changed for a lot of people, and typically not at all for the better.
(And yeah, itās likely that a bunch of people who donāt absolutely need the money will get the checks. Not only is that mostly irrelevant to the goal of keeping the economy running ā where the check recipients are intermediares/conduits for the infusion of cash ā itās also perfectly in line with american (and ostensibly christian) values. Blackstoneās Ratio is encapsulated in the notion that itās better for 10 guilty defendants to go free than 1 innocent defendant imprisoned. Here people are complaining about of Blackstoneās Ratio equivalent of what, 0.1?)
Yes it is from 2019 AGI
Rachel Maddow had it right last night
Why would it make any political sense (forgetting for a moment that it makes no economic sense either)
for Democrats to lower the threshold from where it was when Republicans controlled the Senate?
I agree that that argument elides the dual purpose of the payments: they are both emergency relief and economic stimulus. Where the money is not going for immediate aid, it should be going to people who will spend it to spark the economy. For the latter purpose, then, the cutoff is not only self-damaging, it defeats one purpose of the legislation
Even though Ike would be a hippie in this political environment, we got a Big Tent. That is our strength andāif we want to be fucking bullheaded about itāour weakness.
Good. Since I am just at the arbitrary proposed cut-off this is important for me and ma kiddo. I havenāt forgotten that Biden promised $2000 and that got massaged to 1400 plus what the other guy gave you.
TBF: The lavish salary I take as director of the Karl W. Lewis Foundation is spent, almost entirely, on beverages, some of which may, I suppose, be considered āslushiesā, though those are, often enough, served with salt.