How does the government get cash to deserving people and businesses amid the corona virus?

[steatopygia]

Screw it. If it happens, I know twenty people right now that need it. I’m sure everyone does.

[Alley_Dweller]

@Keeve

Kimera757 quoted the Washington Post:I was going to start a new thread, but that was the perfect segue to my question.

I clearly remember that those $600 checks were not gifts. They were loans that we repaid with a line in the following year’s income taxes. Should expect that this too is an unsecured zero-interest loan from Uncle Sam that we’ll repay next year, or might this be funded from somewhere else?

No, you did not have to repay.

Here is what happened: People who filed tax returns for 2007 and 2008 were eligible for a rebate of up to $600 based on how much tax they owed. (Later, people who received non-taxable retirement payments like Social Security were added to the list.) People who filed tax returns for 2007 automatically got the checks.

Then when you filled out your 2008 return, you had to figure out if you were eligible for any more payment or if you already received the maximum payment based on your 2007 return. People who may not have filed returns in 2007 or who owed less than $600 in taxes may not have received the maximum. So to avoid double-paying the rebate in 2008, you had to do a calculation to see how much, if anything, you were owed for 2008. See the 2008 Form 1040 instructions for line 70 on page 61 (pdf).

[Alley_Dweller]

@Kimera757

Many homeless people don’t have bank accounts, ID or PO boxes, and only those in the shelters can collect their mail for free. I am not surprised such a scheme would not help them.

Getting mail will be a problem, but not having a bank account won’t.

The practice has died out in recent years, but in the past, stores and other businesses would offer incentives for people to bring in their tax refund checks and spend/cash them at the store. I suppose if a homeless person doesn’t have an ID there would still be a problem.

[PastTense]

Which Workers Are Most Vulnerable To The Economic Costs Of The Coronavirus?

A survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation from March 11 to 15 found that 73 percent of workers with a household income of less than $40,000 a year, 68 percent of part-time workers, and 60 percent of self-employed workers are worried that they will lose income due to a workplace closure or reduced hours because of the coronavirus. According to that survey, part-time and self-employed workers are likelier than full-time or salaried workers to say they’ve already lost income so far.

Which Workers Are Most Vulnerable To The Economic Costs Of The Coronavirus?

[cochrane]

@bardos

500,000+ homeless is one cohort. Old folks on food-stamps and ssi don’t usually file

I’m on SSI and still required to file a return. My SSI income is non-taxable, though, but I have to enter the amount on my return from my 10-99.

@Kimera757

I didn’t know elderly Americans on food stamps and SSI don’t need to file.

Again, we do.

[slash2k]

@cochrane

I’m on SSI and still required to file a return. My SSI income is non-taxable, though, but I have to enter the amount on my return from my 10-99.

Again, we do.

SSI (Supplemental Security Income) is always non-taxable and is not reported on a 1099 or on your return; are you thinking of regular Social Security?

People whose only sources of income are SSI and food stamps don’t need to file because they have nothing to report: welfare is not considered income under the Internal Revenue Code.

[bob_2]

@Alley_Dweller

Then when you filled out your 2008 return, you had to figure out if you were eligible for any more payment or if you already received the maximum payment based on your 2007 return. People who may not have filed returns in 2007 or who owed less than $600 in taxes may not have received the maximum. So to avoid double-paying the rebate in 2008, you had to do a calculation to see how much, if anything, you were owed for 2008. See the 2008 Form 1040 instructions for line 70 on page 61 (pdf).

Anyone from the UK who complains about our tax system being complicated should take a glance at the above link.

[UltraVires]

I think the idea is that we don’t care if you “deserve” it or not, we want that money out in the economy so that people aren’t hunkering down and saving thereby not creating economic activity.

So, if you are in a pinch now, this money will help you. If you still have a job and are not hurting, maybe you are fearful and watching your pennies. If you have some extra, then maybe you will order takeout from restaurants or buy a flat screen TV on Amazon or otherwise stimulate the economy.

I think that is the idea anyways. Haven’t thought about it enough to have an opinion on it.

[running_coach]

@UltraVires

I think the idea is that we don’t care if you “deserve” it or not, we want that money out in the economy so that people aren’t hunkering down and saving thereby not creating economic activity.

So, if you are in a pinch now, this money will help you. If you still have a job and are not hurting, maybe you are fearful and watching your pennies. If you have some extra, then maybe you will order takeout from restaurants or buy a flat screen TV on Amazon or otherwise stimulate the economy.
**
I think that is the idea anyways. Haven’t thought about it enough to have an opinion on it.**

Just think how far a trillion could go in developing a vaccine and containing the problem.

[slash2k]

@running_coach

Just think how far a trillion could go in developing a vaccine and containing the problem.

The obstacles to developing a vaccine and containing the problem right now do not seem to be money but time, and those are not interchangeable.

[Velocity]

@running_coach

Just think how far a trillion could go in developing a vaccine and containing the problem.

As someone - I think **LSLGuy **- once said, “One woman can have a baby in 9 months, but nine women can’t have a baby in one month.” There is a limit to what money can do, a scientific bottleneck.