Reports on the COVID stimulus bill negotiations reveal that President Trump was going to push for stimulus checks up to $2,000 for individuals after he received many emails and communications from his supporters about how much they were suffering.
President Trump began drafting his push for these stimulus checks, but aides had to talk him out of it because it was going to stop negotiations and Republicans wouldn't support the higher checks. So, Trump relented.
McConnell, along with other Republicans, would not support anything above $600.
With whom do you agree? President Trump or Mitch McConnell?
Should Americans even get anything? Why should the government be responsible for sending people money?
That check is not about helping people in trouble because of COVID - the huge majority of people have worked right through it. In that respect, no the government is not responsible for giving away what belongs to someone else.
As a stimulus to the economy, it doesn't seem as if it is particularly needed. Again, government is not responsible to re-distribute the wealth of a few to the many. As a recovery from a recession, or even earlier when the economy was in real trouble, maybe. But not now.
But who is right here? Trump or McConnell.
Is Trump right that we need more stimulus or is McConnell right to hold the line on Republican values and keep the bill total under $1 trillion? McConnell is clearly concerned about Republican values of deficit control. Why does President Trump think the answer is more free money?
And the bill is a COVID relief bill. The money is intended to help struggling businesses and people who can't pay rent. If it's not to help people because of COVID, what's it for then?
It's to make people happy with their government. As I said, the large majority do not need a stimulus check as they have worked right along. And those that didn't got a huge bonus in their unemployment checks - another, smaller, bonus would be in order.
Bottom line - neither Trump nor McConnell is right in giving money away to everyone. Help those in need from losing their job (and unable as opposed to unwilling) to find another, not everyone in the country.
Many front-line service workers have lost their jobs - those in the restaurant, hotel, and travel industries. Many people will be evicted soon because they lost a job and can't pay rent.
I agree, many people do not need a stimulus check. I received something like $320 the last time and I didn't need it. I should not have received that money. However, many people do. Businesses do.
I just think it's interesting that the battle is between Republicans on whether $600 is the right amount or $2000 is the right amount. And Trump lost that negotiation quickly and without much fight.
I also think it's interesting that while most experts advise to have six months worth of living expenses in the bank (which admittedly still wouldn't be enough for a lot of people), most aren't even close to that.
Instead of giving away money, the government should be focusing on retraining because a lot of jobs that were lost are never coming back.
How much of the $2,000 proposed was pure, unadulterated politics without ever being intended as a final agreement? Much like the proposal some years ago to make pi equal to 3 - something intended to please constituents but without any expectation or desire to make it so?
Retraining is needed, but in the middle of COVID is not of prime concern. It takes years to do properly and an income is needed right now for those that were laid off. Nevertheless, it is far more important and useful in the long run than any giveaway could ever be (for anyone physically and mentally capable), but it is not the liberal's way of doing things. It is always a handout, never a handup for the Democrats, and to a large extent, the Republican party as well.
IMO the stimulus check is to stimulate the economy. Trump apparently thinks the $2000.00 will give a better boost in spending. Where Mitch is most likely thinking many that the pandemic did not financially hurt need not even get a check. It would appear he thinks we do not need to stimulate growth and borrow less money adding to our huge deficit.
The stimulus is a two-edged knife.
At this point due to the pandemic, I agree with stimulating the economy, sending out the $ 2000.00. It's a gamble, but we have not faced such a crisis in the country and the economy is fragile and will be until we see how things go after we get more people back to work.
It's a relief bill, not a stimulus bill.
The intent of the bill is to provide relief to those suffering from COVID-related issues.
I was addressing the various reasons for why Trump and Mitch have come up with not only different amounts on the stimulus amount but why they came up with differing amounts. Which both men have shared via media.
"Reports on the COVID STIMULOUS bill negotiations reveal that President Trump was going to push for stimulus CHECKS up to $2,000 for individuals after he received many emails and communications from his supporters about how much they were suffering.
President Trump began drafting his push for these STIMULUS CHECKS but aides had to talk him out of it because it was going to stop negotiations and Republicans wouldn't support the HIGHER checks. So, Trump relented."
Please read your comment carefully. It is very evident you were speaking about the stimulus part of the Relief Bill, not the entire Bill. You in no respect addressed any other parts of the Relief Bill.
Your reply seems odd. I pretty much stayed on the subject. The stimulus checks to citizens. You made no mention of anything else.
Why should the government give away money at all?
And do we care about the deficit in this instance? Is President Trump less interested in deficit control than McConnell?
In a crisis like a pandemic in my view, the Government has a duty to provide funds to the citizens to deplete suffering and states in order to provide help to keep a state functioning in regards to services, and programs that benefit the citizens.
During a crisis such as COVID, the deficit in my view should not be considered when getting help to citizens and making attempt to stop a recession.
In my opinion, after listening to a bit of what both men had to say --- Trump sees that funds are needed to help those in dire need, and in some respect stimulate the economy. I have listened and read some of what he has stated. he appears to have empathy for those in need that are suffering financially, and he seems well aware many that who will receive the Stimulus may not have been financially touched by the pandemic and will spend the money which will stimulate the economy. Sort of kill two birds with one stone.
IMO these stimulus checks to citizens are needed, and I hope they decide on $2000.00 rather than $600.00.
I find it very sad and telling that they have held off so long on the Bill. It was clearly a sad political ploy on both sides. There are a lot of people that are suffering, and they could care less.
My understanding is that President Trump's response was because of communications from his constituents that they needed help. Makes sense, right? His response is to send them money.
Isn't that the response of most politicians in reaction to their constituents telling them they need help?
Aren't these people asking for help just moochers?
What is the government's role in helping people in crisis? To my mind, Trump's response is the same as any other politician - write a check.
Actually, it's up to Congress to write a bill to aid the People. Not sure what you are insinuating? Certainly, in the case of a crisis, it is proper and expected the Government step in and alleviate suffering.
Trump is doing what any president would do in a similar crisis, in regards to this form of Relief bill.
Why would you ask me the question ---Aren't these people asking for help just moochers? I will leave you to answer that.
I think my feelings were clear in my comment that there are people suffering and I feel it's the Government's duty to help in many respects.
The really sad thing about either relief amount is "will it go where it is needed?" After the first stimulus giveaway, I saw too many small business owners on TV saying that they didn't get any stimulus money to keep their businesses from folding and that they had either folded or really had a rough time holding on. They stated that the money went to larger businesses that had established credit lines or other established relationships with their banks, and the really needy went without.
On the other hand, too many small construction type companies took the attitude of "why should we work when we can coast on government money." A number of people have stated that they have not been able to hire repairmen or handymen to do work around their homes. After the money ran out, they were finally able to get a broken step repaired or a ceiling fan installed. That was the business end.
As far as individuals go, I know that a lot of people are suffering from lack of money to pay rent, mortgages or buy food. They are suffering. They need help. So I think the money should be on a scale of how much help an individual needs up to $2000. In viewing it that way, Trump may be right because $600 doesn't go far. But McConnell seems to be forward thinking to doing less damage to the U.S. government's debt load. Looking at it that way, he is correct.
Either way you go, I don't think there is a black/white, right or wrong answer to your question.
by Credence2 3 weeks ago
McConnell has got to despise Trump behind closed doors.Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with the $600 per person stimulus package, that McConnell and the Republicans have agreed to. He and the Democrats wants $2,000 per person. I could probably work with the $1200.00 we all received in the first...
by Sharlee 3 weeks ago
After months of inaction, Congress last week passed a $900 billion relief package and a $1.4 trillion spending bill to fund the government through September. The stimulus package included $600 direct payments to individuals and families, enhanced unemployment benefits, small business aid, and...
by JAKE Earthshine 21 months ago
Are you gonna' let this republican rigor mortis looking weirdo named "Granny" Mitch McConnell who presides over one of our most impoverished states called Kentucky, take away what you've earned over the course of your life ?? I mean seriously, you must have known this was coming right ?...
by Peeples 8 years ago
Did this method actually help any? If so why isn't it done more instead of handing money to companies?
by Credence2 1 minute ago
Yes, it is a Salon article, but it reflects my opinion 100 percent. At this juncture, the Republicans and the Right are to get NOTHING. No peace in our time.https://www.salon.com/2021/01/22/mcconn … ull-swing/1. Barack Obama had hardly taken his oath of office on January 20th 2009, before...
by Jack Lee 3 years ago
In the 10 months of the Trump administration, we are seeing hard data that our economy is coming back. The stock market is a leading indicator of things to come. It has crossed over the 23000 mark.That is an 18% increase since Jan. 1 2017.For those who doubt this, I like to understand your...
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|