Once again, a big FUCK YOU to the people picking up the tab

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/07/us/politics/child-tax-credit-stimulus.html

They want to raise the brat tax credit to 3000 per brat, 3600 if it's under 6, and they want very badly to make it permanent. They are positive it would end child poverty because obviously those extra thousands of free cash would be spent on brats and not their breeders. And the phaseouts are HUGE--75k for singles, 150k for married. I'm married and 75k is more than our combined income. But of course, I don't get a tax credit, because it's my responsibility to pay for this bullshit.

I read a document recently written by a financial analyst pointing out the obvious evidence that the mother of all recessions is coming within a few years. Our crippling national debt is going to be a major factor yet the party in charge wants to spend us into oblivion.

It is also interesting to note that many charities and non-profits focus on families and children and screen out needy singles or couples.
So, if you are in trouble, these groups are unlikely to help the childfree either.

Quote

“The pandemic is driving families deeper and deeper into poverty, and it’s devastating,” said Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and one of the champions of the provision. “This money is going to be the difference in a roof over someone’s head or food on their table. This is how the tax code is supposed to work for those who need it most.”

Quote

And the phaseouts are HUGE--75k for singles, 150k for married. I'm married and 75k is more than our combined income.

A couple that is making six figures is NOT needy. A single person who is making less than $75,000 a year should not be incentivized to breed. Wanna bet there will be a backlash of Breeders demanding this for all income levels?

Why are we giving money to people who are breeding and creating additional users of public services? It's economically unsound. Fucking Congress critters.

Weren't they positive the brat credit at $3000 would end child poverty? Child poverty will never be ended because no matter what is given it is ultimately the parunts that can screw it up. Lottery winners have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in the course of a few year. Handing someone more cash doesn't work. It just causes hard feelings among those who are forced to pay higher taxes to pay for this BS and realize that it is throwing good money after bad.

I knew it was going to be "come one, come all forward with your hand out" if a Democrat was elected. Student loan forgiveness up to 50K, baby bonds, universal health care, universal day care, UBI and now this. Existing programs are having funding issues, let's address that first.

I'm rather sick of this phenomenon that Democrats will save the world, they have the same budget as Republicans. Saw the same thing with the last Democrat POTUS. People need to stop looking for their politicians to be their lord and savior and get them out of their mostly self-imposed messes. Then they get angry that the Democrats can't solve all their problems and vote Republican.

I don't support student loan forgiveness either, even though it would have helped me out personally. It is another instance of targeting selected people in the population for decisions they make. What about people who didn't get to go to college? And what about people who have already paid off their loans or will graduate from college with loans in the future? I guess the rest of them are just screwed.

I support no charity that phases out people who don't have kids. Anyone can fall on hard times and being a sprog or making a sprog doesn't make a person more worthy of help or having a full belly.

Romney's anti-poverty program would completely eliminate the SALT deductions to pay for things. Because heaven forbid we tax large corporations to pay their fair share. No, they would make us in blue states shoulder the costs of all this crap. As it is we pay an extra $12k/YEAR because of Trump's fucking up the SALT deductions. We have to budget out one year in advance for this. And this is on top of what we already pay, which is huge. That $12k/year means no Christmas and no birthdays. It means no extra money to shop at local businesses.

Here's an idea: Don't breed what you don't feed. Don't expect the rest of society to pay for your kids. All this extra money will do is encourage breeding willy-nilly by people who can ill afford the ones they already brought into the world.

Quote
Peace
Romney's anti-poverty program would completely eliminate the SALT deductions to pay for things. Because heaven forbid we tax large corporations to pay their fair share. No, they would make us in blue states shoulder the costs of all this crap. As it is we pay an extra $12k/YEAR because of Trump's fucking up the SALT deductions. We have to budget out one year in advance for this. And this is on top of what we already pay, which is huge. That $12k/year means no Christmas and no birthdays. It means no extra money to shop at local businesses.

Here's an idea: Don't breed what you don't feed. Don't expect the rest of society to pay for your kids. All this extra money will do is encourage breeding willy-nilly by people who can ill afford the ones they already brought into the world.

$12k is a lot of money Peace. Lots of money for an individual, not for a corporation. The corporations that have workers on welfare yet have CEOs on the Forbes list can be first in line to pay this.

Quote
freya
$12k is a lot of money Peace. Lots of money for an individual, not for a corporation. The corporations that have workers on welfare yet have CEOs on the Forbes list can be first in line to pay this.

If you think the rich will be willing to pay up think again!

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

Do these people not realize that giving breeders free money just because they bred will likely result in a higher rate of child poverty? Even the dumbest assholes can connect the dots when someone gives them money for having kids and that just gives people an incentive to breed more often. Not to mention the fact that breeders in poverty are often that way due to horrible money management skills - if you give them no strings attached money that they don't have to repay, they'll go blow it on stupid shit and then stick their hands out for more because "muh childrun!"

The fucking welfare system should be proof enough that you should not give breeders financial incentives for reproducing because they'll exploit them and then bitch about family discrimination because no matter how much they get, it's never enough. I'd like to see some of these fuckers survive on the income of a single person who doesn't get all the extra benefits breeders get.

So this is gonna start in July and will last a full year. Do they realize how many women will now try to get knocked up in order to try and give birth before the end of 2021 just so they can get dibs on an additional $3,600 for having a child under six? You know plenty of women would not be above trying to induce premature labor to ensure they sluice in time.

Also, if parents are getting these big fat checks for their broods, that should mean they have enough to feed their goddamn kids. So the schools that aren't even open for class shouldn't have to provide breakfast and lunch for them anymore, right? Oh wait, probably not. I forgot that for some parents, the 70-cent poor lunch is still far too expensive, meanwhile these very same parents have $600 phones.

Quote

“The pandemic is driving families deeper and deeper into poverty, and it’s devastating”

Quote

“This money is going to be the difference in a roof over someone’s head or food on their table. This is how the tax code is supposed to work for those who need it most.”

Oh, but this only applies to families with children. As we all know, families without children are wiping their asses with hundred dollar bills because they're so loaded. People without brats need money too, asshole! Poverty can be even more devastating to people without kids because nobody gives a fuck if a single person and their cat or an unchilded couple starve and have to live in their car because they can't afford rent.

They're already expanding other forms of welfare as well. I don't recall the exact mechanism, but food stamps has already been extended, or is part of the latest stimulus package.

I wouldn't have such a problem with food stamps if it was restricted to nutritious food only. I'll never understand why you can buy soda with food stamps, but not a rotisserie chicken. If I ran the program, you wouldn't be able to buy candy, soda, chips or baked goods with the money, just fresh fruits and vegetables, dairy products, eggs, cheap cuts of meat (no steak and lobster!) and frozen or canned goods.

They get cash. They use it to buy beer, cigarettes and lottery tickets.

I might not have a problem with it either if everyone received help equally.

Quote
JoJo
I wouldn't have such a problem with food stamps if it was restricted to nutritious food only. I'll never understand why you can buy soda with food stamps, but not a rotisserie chicken. If I ran the program, you wouldn't be able to buy candy, soda, chips or baked goods with the money, just fresh fruits and vegetables, dairy products, eggs, cheap cuts of meat (no steak and lobster!) and frozen or canned goods.

I'd be perfectly fine with that too, but then breeders would bitch that they're too bizzy to cook proper meals and their brats won't eat healthy food, so food stamps only covering healthy food (or even just real food) is akin to making them starve and they'd scream and stomp until they got their own way. The little piggies "need" their sugar water, cheese doodles and Little Debbie cakes because they "won't" eat anything else. At least half the time, I think "my kids won't eat healthy food" is code word for "I don't want to eat healthy food, but my kids will scream if I eat garbage and make them eat vegetables, so I'll blame them instead."

But even if these kinds of limitations were put in place, breeders would find a way around them because if there is one thing a breeder will work hard at, it's finding a way to exploit a loophole in something already meant to help them.

Not to mention that eating all that sugary/fatty shit long term and in excess can lead to type II diabetes. By limiting what breeders and their sproggen can get with food stamps, it might reduce the number of obese adults and kids who wind up with insulin resistance - which is likely paid for by the rest of us via Medicaid if the proud momma hog and her piglets are on SNAP too. But oh well, a little diabeetus before puberty never hurt anybody, right?

Quote
toraneko
They're already expanding other forms of welfare as well. I don't recall the exact mechanism, but food stamps has already been extended, or is part of the latest stimulus package.

I heard something earlier today about food stamps being extended to college students based on their parents' income like financial aid is. I think that's a good idea, especially if the school is like the one I went to and had no meal plan, or even if there is a meal plan, they're usually fucking expensive. College costs way too much as it is, though I do wonder how many students will be on campus right now anyway. Wouldn't most of them still be at home with Mom and Dad eating their food?

And even for the ones who don't get cash for food, they can find ways to get it. Several times in college, I had people approach me and offer to buy my groceries with their SNAP cards if I would be willing to give them the same cash amount in return. I didn't understand it at the time, but I'm pretty sure these people were doing this so they could get cash because you can't buy booze, drugs and cigarettes with food stamps.

Well this is surprising. Repugnicans want to pay breeders even more than the democrats' plan:

https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/2/9/22274710/the-case-for-and-against-mitt-romney-utah-child-allowance-plan-draws-anti-poverty-measure

Romney wants to pay them monthly while Rubio and Lee want an even bigger tax credit. Romney's plan has no work requirement.

Quote
toraneko
Well this is surprising. Repugnicans want to pay breeders even more than the democrats' plan:

https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2021/2/9/22274710/the-case-for-and-against-mitt-romney-utah-child-allowance-plan-draws-anti-poverty-measure

Romney wants to pay them monthly while Rubio and Lee want an even bigger tax credit. Romney's plan has no work requirement.

This is cuz the USA is not producing bags of children to send into the army for the endless wars the Republicans so richly love. They'll give beanies to the cows to pop out children, then demand repayment of the kid's lives once they turn 18.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

Quote
bell_flower
Why are we giving money to people who are breeding and creating additional users of public services? It's economically unsound. Fucking Congress critters.

This scenario is called Buying Votes with taxpayer money. Both parties do it. (They are not very different in my opinion)

Quote
toraneko
They get cash. They use it to buy beer, cigarettes and lottery tickets.

I might not have a problem with it either if everyone received help equally.

Here is my problem: adding money to the system without adding producing capacity does not increase personal wealth. All it does is increase the rate of inflation but most people in congress and senate are too busy buying votes so their jobs depend on not understanding it. Hyper inflation has not led ANY nation into a better lifestyle. Neither did overpopulation.

Quote
toraneko
I read a document recently written by a financial analyst pointing out the obvious evidence that the mother of all recessions is coming within a few years. Our crippling national debt is going to be a major factor yet the party in charge wants to spend us into oblivion.

If you can post a link to this document, I would be more than interested to read it.

This is a disturbing subject for many. It is also a very important subject for CF people, more so than other groups. If economy tanks and there are people in need, those with young kids will be assisted first. CF people are going to be at the bottom of the list, if they make a list at all.

As of right now, I am concerned with real inflation. What Fed measures as inflation may or may not be the real deal. I am thinking it is much higher than most economists are imagining. We can hedge against inflation somewhat with real estate, gold or bitcoin, but my concern is that if prices skyrocket, everyday things are going to cost a fortune. Selling big ticket items might not be easy if people need all the money that they have just to keep lights on and buy groceries.

This subject may not seem like a CF subject, but I attest that it is. We are the ones who pay the most into the system from which we are likely to receive the least if we were in need.

I found it here:

https://www.mauldineconomics.com/landing/the-great-reset?utm_campaign=JM-305&utm_content=3rgn94xz&utm_medium=ED&utm_source=for

The page is spammy, but the actual document is very scientific. I don't know why they had to distribute it in this less-than-credible format.

Quote
freya
$12k is a lot of money Peace. Lots of money for an individual, not for a corporation. The corporations that have workers on welfare yet have CEOs on the Forbes list can be first in line to pay this.

Big business has bought both sides of the isle. Need I say more?

Quote
toraneko
I found it here:

https://www.mauldineconomics.com/landing/the-great-reset?utm_campaign=JM-305&utm_content=3rgn94xz&utm_medium=ED&utm_source=for

The page is spammy, but the actual document is very scientific. I don't know why they had to distribute it in this less-than-credible format.

It seems to me that they want e-mail to be able to view content. It is ok. Basic economics will tell us that printing money does not create wealth. It creates poverty. More money without more goods makes prices of goods increase. Prices of goods always rise faster than wages. If a person has to pay 10 times more for utilities, property taxes and food, they may end up being forced to sell their house. Which takes them into rentals, where rents can be increased, so they now have to move to a smaller or shared rental. In such series of events, a person can be left without money and without a place to live.

Being CF is another thing that can go either way. On one hand, expenses are easier to control. On another hand, historically, breeders have always received financial help before anyone else.

I used a fake email to get it. It talks about how corporate and government debt is reaching a level that is past recoverable. It was long and had lots of evidence to support his claims. I don't remember the specifics right now, but the problem is especially bad in the EU. It has to do with the finance laws that enabled the Game Stop rebellion allowing mega corporations to over-borrow by issuing corporate bonds and governments carrying crippling debt.

Quote
toraneko
I used a fake email to get it. It talks about how corporate and government debt is reaching a level that is past recoverable. It was long and had lots of evidence to support his claims. I don't remember the specifics right now, but the problem is especially bad in the EU. It has to do with the finance laws that enabled the Game Stop rebellion allowing mega corporations to over-borrow by issuing corporate bonds and governments carrying crippling debt.

I don't know how valid this summary below is of the Game Stop rebellion but it rings true. I'm attempting to understand what was going on with Game Stop. I did research and confirmed the relationship between Robinhood and Citadel. Similar to the rich having loopholes to prevent them from paying higher taxes that the little guy gets stuck paying. Based on the below comment I would guess that hedge funds are in the habit of paying SEC fines rather than taking larger losses. This is something a small investor isn't able to leverage. Can you imagine a regular person saying that they will pay SEC fines and suppress the price of a stock/prevent trade execution because ultimately they will make more money by doing so?

Perhaps something similar is happening in the EU with the FRC?

I found this post at this link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25941431

Quote
comment from link
Robinhood doesn't actually execute any trades. They sell user's trade orders to Citadel, a trade executor. Citadel then buys the shares on the market, and sells them to Robinhood for a slight markup. It's how Robinhood offers trades for $0 fees. You pay pennies more per share, but don't have to spend $5 per trade.Citadel, and other trade executors, are refusing to buy shares for retail traders. Coincidentally, Citadel also bailed out Melvin fund for their short position in GME. So, Citadel has an interest in not letting the price go up any further. And citadel controls trade execution for dozens of firms.This is definitely illegal. But Citadel is betting that the resulting SEC fines from this illegal manipulation will be less than the loss they would get if they didn't suppress the price.

I've been following this closely, and from what I've been reading, this is correct. Citadel and Robin hood are also conniving not to give retail traders the best prices for stocks. They look for the biggest spread between the ask and the bid and choose those. I couldn't explain it, as I didn't fully understand it, but I think that is the point. They overcomplicate this shit as much as possible so average people can't understand it, and usually those are the ones making laws, not finance phd's. Obscurity was Enron's strategy as well.

Look. johnson (quite the racist) accelerated the destruction of family and poverty with the war on poverty. At that point in time the black family was actually structurally sounder than whitey. It is reversed now; welfare is an equal opportunity destroyer. But it creates, imo, a cattle strata of society. Welfare is designed to keep its participants exactly where they are. They have the illusion of freedom, but it is limited to the slops they are doled out. In short, nothing new under the sun; the poor will be with us always. Booker T Washington said (I'm still trying to find it) to never accept government handouts. I think he has been proven right, unfortunately.

two cents ¢¢

CERTIFIED HOSEHEAD!!!

people (especially women) do not give ONE DAMN about what they inflict on children and I defy anyone to prove me wrong

Dysfunctional relationships almost always have a child. The more dysfunctional, the more children.

The selfish wants of adults outweigh the needs of the child.

Some mistakes cannot be fixed, but some mistakes can be 'fixed'.

People who say they sleep like a baby usually don't have one. Leo J. Burke

Adoption agencies have strict criteria (usually). Breeders, whose combined IQ's would barely hit triple digits, have none.

Quote
toraneko
They get cash. They use it to buy beer, cigarettes and lottery tickets.

I might not have a problem with it either if everyone received help equally.

Manicures for the Welfare Moos, and tattoos for both the Welfare Moos and Duhs.