7 ms·

You're aware that a significant portion of people and businesses in the United States pay essentially no taxes, right? Especially the more vulnerable parts of s

You're aware that a significant portion of people and businesses in the United States pay essentially no taxes, right? Especially the more vulnerable parts of society?

mcculley 5y ago
You think it is better that corporations received welfare?
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If the purpose is to keep payroll flowing to individual people for a while, yes, that’s exactly better than a system that is fairer-sounding but doesn’t accomplish the stated goal.
  - mcculley 5y ago
    Why should the purpose be to keep payroll flowing? Why not give money directly to people and let the market figure out where the payroll should be? The focus on payroll is exactly why corporations benefitted at the expense of people.
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      Because one of the concerns that would lead to an economic collapse is 40+% unemployment. Providing payroll protection is a very targeted measure against that. The last thing I need is for my six-figure 2019 taxes (good investment returns that year) to be rebated back to me for a job I wasn’t going to lose anyway while 1000s of people in my town lose their restaurant and retail jobs. That’s targeted in exactly the wrong direction I think.
      - mcculley 5y ago
        I am not interested in the outcome for people like you and I. There could have been a ceiling on the refund. As I said in an edit to my original comment, I run two businesses which each received both PPP loans. I and my employees benefitted. I still think it was unfair. My employees should have received money directly and been allowed the agency to determine how to spend that money in a pandemic world. Instead, we propped up businesses that failed anyway and now there is less money to invest in new businesses. I know of businesses that employed people doing nothing. I also know of businesses that took the loan and still laid people off. This is not good for GDP. It would have been better to stimulate at the individual level.
- Godel_unicode 5y ago
  I think that pausing our economy to the extent possible and allowing people and businesses to pick back up where they left off after the pandemic is incomparably better than screwing over the poorest in our society, yes. I understand that not everyone feels that way.
  - mcculley 5y ago
    We are not picking up where we left off. The economy post-COVID is different than the pre-COVID one. We should give as much power as possible to the market to figure that out. Instead, we propped up failing businesses with welfare and extended the economic impact.

You're aware that a significant portion of people and businesses in the United States pay essentially no taxes, right? Especially the more vulnerable parts of society?

mcculley 5y ago

You think it is better that corporations received welfare?

sokoloff 5y ago
If the purpose is to keep payroll flowing to individual people for a while, yes, that’s exactly better than a system that is fairer-sounding but doesn’t accomplish the stated goal.
- mcculley 5y ago
  Why should the purpose be to keep payroll flowing? Why not give money directly to people and let the market figure out where the payroll should be? The focus on payroll is exactly why corporations benefitted at the expense of people.
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    Because one of the concerns that would lead to an economic collapse is 40+% unemployment. Providing payroll protection is a very targeted measure against that. The last thing I need is for my six-figure 2019 taxes (good investment returns that year) to be rebated back to me for a job I wasn’t going to lose anyway while 1000s of people in my town lose their restaurant and retail jobs. That’s targeted in exactly the wrong direction I think.
    - mcculley 5y ago
      I am not interested in the outcome for people like you and I. There could have been a ceiling on the refund. As I said in an edit to my original comment, I run two businesses which each received both PPP loans. I and my employees benefitted. I still think it was unfair. My employees should have received money directly and been allowed the agency to determine how to spend that money in a pandemic world. Instead, we propped up businesses that failed anyway and now there is less money to invest in new businesses. I know of businesses that employed people doing nothing. I also know of businesses that took the loan and still laid people off. This is not good for GDP. It would have been better to stimulate at the individual level.
Godel_unicode 5y ago
I think that pausing our economy to the extent possible and allowing people and businesses to pick back up where they left off after the pandemic is incomparably better than screwing over the poorest in our society, yes. I understand that not everyone feels that way.
- mcculley 5y ago
  We are not picking up where we left off. The economy post-COVID is different than the pre-COVID one. We should give as much power as possible to the market to figure that out. Instead, we propped up failing businesses with welfare and extended the economic impact.