GOP blocks House Democrats' attempt to pass $2,000 stimulus checks

Or you twist what you read in to something you want and need to understanding

 

Let them starve?

 

My questions are quite clear.

If the employment rates are nearing full employment now why do people need this money? Government workers have worked all through this thing receiving their paychecks, should they be getting this money? If so why?

 

Increasing UE benefits keeps the unemployed from starving. Those of us who haven't lost work throughout, don't need it. We just got ours, actually, and gave most of it to charity.

Why hand out tax dollars to people who don't need it?

 

Are government workers who have been on the job all this time and getting their normal pay starving? Unemployment is getting below 5%, 3.6% in my county 4.4% in the state. Why should people who are working and making money and not starving be getting any government handout?

Why not means test it and if you are not working because of COVID OK you get some assistance. By why if you are working full time?

 

It was rhetorical dig at Trump, not an actual policy recommendation.

 

It's very hard to make sense of the idea that giving people more free money is an incentive to get them to work. Seems like a socialism =D

 

I think Trump and dems are right, the check should have been bigger

 

Get a damn clue--there are no jobs for millions of people who worked in businesses many people won't frequent even in they're running. Your comment is a slap in the face.

It's a hard call because holding down benefits to levels suitable for low-income earners will leave people who had better jobs unable to pay their bills.

 

It's typical of out stingy help we offer in this country. We spend so much time making sure no one gets extra, we end of letting people fall between the cracks.

 

They aren't.

Because they don't have a job.

The money should be directed to the unemployed.

 

Agreed.

Someone may get something you and I don't.

 

So what?

 

We should be helping unemployed folks and those whose businesses are hurt by low demand or forced shutdown. The rest of us? No.

 

That was the point.

 

Vote out incumbents. Every election for the next 12 yrs.

 

What do you think?
A trump voter.

 

The idea is to put food on the table and keep a roof over folks' heads. Some folks may not work as a result, but there are plenty of unemployed who will.

Why? Socialism is collectivized production.

 

If most of the voters, vote against the incumbents, they are limited to 1 term.
See current POTUS, 1 term.

 

I agree. I just like pointing out the irony of the far RW. For 4 years, they have used buzz words like communism and socialism, but fail to realize the things that they endorse have some characteristics of socialism.

 

Actually, he embarrassed republicans.
And now he has republicans in the house going against him and Americans for not wanting to give $2000.
The Senate now will go on record as the house passed the $2000 check along party lines. D's yea, R's Nay.

But my guess, Mitch won't bring it to the floor and put his Senators on the hook. If he does, they lose Ga. IMO.

 

That poster was all for $2000 until trump signed the $600.

 

500 million to Israel is the largest I believe

 

It's really amazing the blind loyalty Trump's base has. The same $600 that wasn't enough last Monday is fine today because the Senate promised they would bring the $2000 stimulus to a vote. Last time I checked, promises don't put food on the table.

 

Unfortunately the "if" is of incalculable size.