That is a positive for sure. I hadn’t seen that piece
In the second piece here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/03/24/trump-coronavirus-congress-economic-stimulus/
Democratic aides said they were optimistic that a strong bipartisan Senate vote would make it possible to pass the bill by unanimous consent in the House — a process requiring only two members present in the House chamber.
However, any lawmaker of either party could object, and in an early warning sign Tuesday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) voiced concern about the legislation over Twitter, writing that despite “vague statements” no one had seen text of the legislation that “seems to give a HALF TRILLION DOLLARS away to big corporations, w/ few worker protections.”
If unanimous consent is not possible, aides of both parties said the most likely scenario would be a day-long vote where members would be encouraged to spread out their trips to the floor and not congregate as the vote is taken.
Not gonna bother spending any of my time looking into the details and just assume I get nothing from whatever just happened.
3 Likes
How does federal shit like this work when the dope wants states to open for business and you have 10-15 states saying “LOL no.”?
Let’s say you have 2 single mothers. One in NY and one in AL.
NY has shelter at home and AL doesn’t. Do both women get $1200?
Everyone under the 75k threshold should get the one time payment if I am reading it correctly.
I get that but the woman in NY can’t work because of a shelter in place order. Meanwhile the woman in AL can work.
So what happens to the woman in NY if she can’t work for 3 months or whatever? Meanwhile, the woman in AL hasn’t missed a day of work and now has an extra $1,200.
I agree everyone should get it. But it doesn’t solve the problem of one area not shutting down but another area is; yet they get the same amount.
They boosted unemployment adding 600 extra a month for 4 months.
2 Likes
woman in NY will be able to apply for unemployment + 600 extra per week from the feds.
2 Likes
https://mobile.twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1242692703386775552
Not sure that there is not an easy kushner back door in this.
Think its 600 a week, not month. So an extra 2400/mo
1 Like
I believe you I think I just keep saying month for no good reason.
Oh OK. That’s actually not bad.
Right, if everything we are reading is correct, its essentially a continuation of bailout funds for up to 4 months for those who are unemployed or laid off by this.
There is, it’s called “lol fuck you.” I mean it’s worked to get around the same provision in the Constitution, why not this law?
(I realize this law prevents paying, not just receiving, but there will still be some “lol fuck you’s” involved)
1 Like
What if she’s not laid off but isn’t getting shifts? What if she works two part time jobs and gets no hours? What if the one in Alabama is scared to work and her boss says she has to? What about self-employed folks?
The answers to these questions go a long way toward whether or not this bill is good, acceptable, or just better than nothing.
1 Like
“The president doesn’t control his businesses, his kids do. Don’t you remember the huge stack of legal documents when he turned over control? Lol fuck you.”
3 Likes
BUT HOW ARE WE GONNA PAY FOR IT!!!
3 Likes
The ban is supposedly extended to children, spouses, and in-laws.
2 Likes
What is the enforcement mechanism? I doubt there is one, but even if there is, I doubt it is anything strong enough to withstand the “lol, fuck you” cheat code.
2 Likes
Violators must listen to Susan Collins being concerned about their actions.
What’s the enforcement mechanism if you ban companies receiving bailout money from using it for stock buy-backs?
1 Like