(04-20-2020, 02:40 PM)TJBender Wrote:

(04-20-2020, 02:19 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: My complaint was that the government assumes people in a certain income bracket do not experience hardships from a pandemic.

Let me break it down for you like this. Let's say hypothetically I make 200K a year and 75% of that 200K is from rental property income. When judges won't take eviction cases and people stop paying rent because some talking head on TV thought it was a good idea that directly impacts said person making 200K a year.

See how that whole trickle down thing can impact people making too much to qualify for stimulus relief?

Did they incorporate? Then they should receive small business loans as part of the stimulus--should have, anyway, before all involved handled those funds like a dozen monkeys [BLEEP] a football. Did they not incorporate? Good God man, why not?

And there's my heartless angle, too: I make a whole lot less than $200K, and I've managed to build up an entire year worth of safety net in savings. If something happens, I could change absolutely nothing about the way I live and sustain for an entire year. That was before the stimulus deposit came in. If someone making $200K hasn't figured out how to build up a six-month safety net, even if that involves not spending as much, then I don't know what to say beyond fire your accountant if you have one, and hire one if you don't.

So, we have common ground on the handling of the funds and acting like monkeys in heat.

Now you are getting into personal responsibility of saving for "a rainy day". Most peoples rainy days don't last this long.

You bring up an interesting point about someone making a 6 figure income not figuring out how to build up a six-month safety net. Don't you feel that ALL businesses should do the same? If that were the case, there wouldn't be 10M unemployment claims in the past few weeks. Based on your example, we wouldn't even need a government if every business acted responsibly by stockpiling their reserves.

---