>>9794684see
>>>/pol/248665617the sentiment has bipartisan support, and right now they're debating exactly how to implement it. there are very few proposals that involves tax breaks or tethering things to taxes, and the one that trump is backing isn't the worst one but it's a bad idea regardless
even the "best option" of tax refunding isn't great, since that's throwing a lot more debt on at once and that problem isn't going away, but i can at least agree kicking a can is better than letting it explode in your face right now
and this isn't even addressing the larger issue, which thankfully some key senate republicans have been pointing out, which is
>pumping money into the economy that legitimately has people not working is not going to do anythingbecause fiat money doesn't magically make products appear on the shelves. but it's entirely likely a shitty "stimulus" wealth-giving bill is going to be passed for entirely social/political reasons and not sound economics, so democrats can't point at trump and say he did nothing (they will anyway, but w/e)
legitimately trump is making a major mistake here even letting the states get away with this "oh we declared everyone is shut down teehee." it means our economy and therefore our country can be held ransom by a select few governors. i'm not suggesting the extreme of "arrest them" unless there literally is no other way to interdict, but the federal government is supposed to have jurisdiction over interstate trade and they have stepped in for far less prominent reasons before
every day this goes on we dig ourselves into a deeper recession, the DOW is dropping like a fucking stone, and oil prices are going crazy: it may already be we've passed the point of just bouncing back from this. this entire "giving out money" conversation is pure distraction from the real issue and is giving people the idea that far-left ideas are credible and successful ("just a little bit of socialism, it won't hurt")
