Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Joe Mammy

Yang Plan

Recommended Posts

If you were president right now, how would you design a coronavirus-specific basic income relief plan? 

I would do a flat $1,000 per individual adult and then $500 per child under 18 and do it for three months. I like the earned income tax credit, but it doesn’t capture everyone that it would need to, and you don’t have much time in this kind of crisis. The downsides of being under-inclusive are high, so you’d want to err on the side of completeness if you can. Just say, ‘Look, if you’re an adult you get $1,000, and for every child you get an additional $500.’ That would secure more people’s ability to weather this storm.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His plan makes a lot of sense right now 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think $1000 would go far enough. Maybe something along the lines of $500 a week or so could cover people a bit better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, huthut said:

I don't think $1000 would go far enough. Maybe something along the lines of $500 a week or so could cover people a bit better. 

Someone making $10 an hour makes grosses like $1700/month if they’re lucky enough to get 40 hours

you don’t think $1000 a month would help them 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dan Lambskin said:

Someone making $10 an hour makes grosses like $1700/month if they’re lucky enough to get 40 hours

you don’t think $1000 a month would help them 

Would you means test it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dan Lambskin said:

Someone making $10 an hour makes grosses like $1700/month if they’re lucky enough to get 40 hours

you don’t think $1000 a month would help them 

it wouldn't help me. I would need at least $500 a week and I don't see why we can't do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Would you means test it?

Not sure I follow

12 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

it wouldn't help me. I would need at least $500 a week and I don't see why we can't do that.

Is it better than what the government is giving you now?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This man should have been our next President.

  • Like 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Would you means test it?

I wouldn’t, would you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HellToupee said:

I wouldn’t, would you?

I think I would.  By way of example, I don't need the $1,000, and receiving it wouldn't affect my consumption during this crisis in the least.  Given that I'm not a one-percenter, I would think there are a whole lot of folks like me out there.  I'd rather use those funds for other relief efforts and assistance than giving money to the affluent who don't need it.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dan Lambskin said:

Not sure I follow

Put simply, would you have taxpayers fund giving $1,000 per month to rich people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Dan Lambskin said:

Not sure I follow

Is it better than what the government is giving you now?

It doesn't matter what the government is giving me now.  I want more because why not? $500 doesn't seem like much.

Edited by BladeRunner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Put simply, would you have taxpayers fund giving $1,000 per month to rich people?

What do you mean by "rich"?  Who draws that line?  What is the "rich" line?

If you're Bernie, for example, the "rich" (despite having millions of dollars himself and 3 houses) is always the guy making more than you - it's never you personally.

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

What do you mean by "rich"?  Who draws that line?  What is the "rich" line?

If you're Bernie, for example, the "rich" (despite having millions of dollars himself and 3 houses) is always the guy making more than you - it's never you.

Trump just drew the line at people making more than a million dollars per year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bigbottom said:

Trump just drew the line at people making more than a million dollars per year.

Fantastic.

That means we can get more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

Fantastic.

That means we can get more?

I don't understand your question.  But if you mean that people who are more in need can get higher payouts, that's precisely what means testing implies.  And I'm good with that if there is a feasible way to accomplish it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Put simply, would you have taxpayers fund giving $1,000 per month to rich people?

Yes there should probably be a cutoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

If you're Bernie, for example, the "rich" (despite having millions of dollars himself and 3 houses) is always the guy making more than you - it's never you personally.

For what it's worth, my post upthread expressly stated that "it's me personally."

Edited by bigbottom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bigbottom said:

For what it's worth, my first post in the thread expressly stated that "it's me personally."

I appreciate you stating that.  Not many do.  :thumbup:

They never think of themselves as "the rich" when they clearly and obviously are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

I think I would.  By way of example, I don't need the $1,000, and receiving it wouldn't affect my consumption during this crisis in the least.  Given that I'm not a one-percenter, I would think there are a whole lot of folks like me out there.  I'd rather use those funds for other relief efforts and assistance than giving money to the affluent who don't need it.

I posted this in the other thread, but I agree. They should have an option to decline. Or an opt-in provision or something.

I would decline. And I don't make $1mm per year.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the easiest way to do it is to send it to everyone and encourage people to donate it if they don't need it. I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, whoknew said:

I posted this in the other thread, but I agree. They should have an option to decline. Or an opt-in provision or something.

I would decline. And I don't make $1mm per year.

Neither do I.  Not even close.

And I just saw your post and liked it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, whoknew said:

Maybe the easiest way to do it is to send it to everyone and encourage people to donate it if they don't need it. I don't know.

Why not donate it to local businesses by spending it when things open again

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HellToupee said:

Why not donate it to local businesses by spending it when things open again

Maybe. But my biggest concern right now is people who live paycheck to paycheck being able to afford their rent. So I'd rather donate it to some place that helps with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HellToupee said:

Why not donate it to local businesses by spending it when things open again

That's a good idea.  But unfortunately, many local/small businesses may not open again after all is said and done.  It's a really depressing state of affairs for small businesses that will be impacted by this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best thing about UBI is that our economy has always been trickle-up, it's consumer driven. Maybe some people use their UBI for buying smokes and alcohol; Maybe some use it on a car loan. Some might save their UBI and start a business. Some might invest it in the market. For those who use it wisely, the gains are taxed, for those who piss it away it goes into another's hands. The money doesn't go away. There is an absolute return on investment. 

  • Like 4
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead we got two fossils battling it out and both have a good chance of not lasting 4 more years. This guy is smarter than those 2 combined yet D's can only keep rolling out old used up career politicians with no new ideas. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bigbottom said:

Put simply, would you have taxpayers fund giving $1,000 per month to rich people?

Isn't the idea that the stipend isn't necessarily to keep people afloat but instead to rejuvenate the economy? 

I would put myself in the same boat as you financially. We aren't 1%s, but we will be okay. Nonetheless, I'm definitely cutting down on some of my more frivolous expenses. but, if my wife and I each got $1,000, we would probably spend it on non-essentials - which are likely the industries most badly hit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Instead we got two fossils battling it out and both have a good chance of not lasting 4 more years. This guy is smarter than those 2 combined yet D's can only keep rolling out old used up career politicians with no new ideas. 

The party that demands diversity, excoriates men in general (and white men in particular) and believes everything a woman says regardless is putting up two ancient MALE fossils as their choices.

Guess diversity is only something everyone else is supposed to practice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bigbottom said:

Would you means test it?

Nope.

The great thing about universal entitlements is that they become progressive when you pay for them with progressive tax policies.  So yeah, Jeff Bezos doesn't need UBI.  But he should be paying more for everyone's UBI anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bigbottom said:

Trump just drew the line at people making more than a million dollars per year.

Lucky for me, I'm just under that limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Zow said:

Isn't the idea that the stipend isn't necessarily to keep people afloat but instead to rejuvenate the economy? 

I would put myself in the same boat as you financially. We aren't 1%s, but we will be okay. Nonetheless, I'm definitely cutting down on some of my more frivolous expenses. but, if my wife and I each got $1,000, we would probably spend it on non-essentials - which are likely the industries most badly hit. 

Getting an extra $1,000 per month would not affect my consumption one iota during this crisis. I will likely donate it, however. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Nope.

The great thing about universal entitlements is that they become progressive when you pay for them with progressive tax policies.  So yeah, Jeff Bezos doesn't need UBI.  But he should be paying more for everyone's UBI anyway.  

I thought we were talking about a temporary coronavirus relief plan, not a permanent UBI program. But you may feel the same regardless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want 1000 per adult.  Full unemployment for 99 weeks minimum.  Free food stamps and mortgage principal forgiveness.  

I mean we can do it right??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Getting an extra $1,000 per month would not affect my consumption one iota during this crisis. I will likely donate it, however. 

I anticipate being pretty bored at times. I am very confident I'd spend that extra thousand on some unnecessary Amazon purchases, more expensive takeout, a new golf club, etc. that I otherwise wouldn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lod001 said:

Instead we got two fossils battling it out and both have a good chance of not lasting 4 more years. This guy is smarter than those 2 combined yet D's can only keep rolling out old used up career politicians with no new ideas. 

Three fossils.  There's one already in the White House.  

 

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Biden tags Yang as his VP.

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

I thought we were talking about a temporary coronavirus relief plan, not a permanent UBI program. But you may feel the same regardless. 

Right. It’s just a temporary UBI. In an emergency situation, the inefficiency involved in means testing is an even bigger problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would be awesome if he was able to re-enter the race, obviously too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yang's plan does not seem so far fetched now. Vote tomorrow should let us know what the number is. They're bandying about up to $2000 per citizen with more on the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/17/2020 at 6:54 PM, Thunderlips said:

Three fossils.  There's one already in the White House.  

 

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Biden tags Yang as his VP.

Man, that could get my vote because Biden is almost incapacitated. That puts Yang in charge.

Edited by lod001
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/19/2020 at 2:32 PM, -jb- said:

would be awesome if he was able to re-enter the race, obviously too late.

nah

Edited by GROOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Joe Mammy said:

Yang's plan does not seem so far fetched now. Vote tomorrow should let us know what the number is. They're bandying about up to $2000 per citizen with more on the way.

only middle class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Man, that could get my vote because Biden is almost incapacitated. That puts Yang in charge.

I'm not going to lay Biden on deaths door.....but I think Bidens VP choice is MUCH more important than ones in the past 20 years; at the least for the idea that I don't see Biden running two terms and whomever is the VP will/should end up being the titular head of the Democratic Party for 2024.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yang isn't a woman, so Biden would need to retract his commitment to having a  woman as VP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -jb- said:

Yang isn't a woman, so Biden would need to retract his commitment to having a  woman as VP.

Maybe another spot? Not sure what would be the best fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Leroy Hoard said:

Maybe another spot? Not sure what would be the best fit.

Put him in any spot and it would be an upgrade to what's there now.  Economic advisor, _______ advisor, any title would work.  And yes, I'd want him on my team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.