General Politics Discussion VIII [ARCHIVED] • Page 1523

I feel like you are ignoring the fact that many (most?) people do not pay quite as close attention to these things as you do and thus would have found their misleading language much more misleading than you did.

 

I think most people understand that $1,400 + $600 = $2,000 and that expecting a full extra $2,000 is a pipedream that goes beyond what was promised

 

Question from an ignorant, non-parent: what does it mean for the CTC to be "fully refundable"? Is that not free money? Why would you want to refund it? The plan is to send monthly checks, not give it in a tax refund at the end of the year

 

TBH, I think the "Online Left" are the ones that are a bit....not out of touch, but...perhaps maybe overestimating what the normies might think about this.

 

So let's say I agree with what you said here - what would you say is the reason to continually use the term "$2000 checks"...???

 

There is good in the proposal, but will help instantly is $2000.

 

harris can break the tie and manchin can be threatened with his committee assignments and potential to be primaried if that's what it takes. if the dems can't even do something as simple as sending people money in a pandemic then there's 0 point standing up for any of them. you wanna see voter apathy? the trump characture won't be on the ballot in 2024 and disdain towards dems for abandoning them during COVID is how you're gonna see that apathy soar.

 

GIVE ME TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS

 

Same reason people say "defund the police" instead of "redistribute the resources that go to policing and instead reinvest them in community driving measures which are proven to reduce crime while still protecting society". Catchy slogans help sell stuff.

"$2000 checks" is catchier than "A $1,400 check in addition to the $600 already sent out to bring the total up to $2,000". People were already behind the idea of $2,000 checks, so the idea was there in people's minds and the promise was to deliver on what the people originally wanted.

 

The CTC was fully refundable until the TCJA. The TCJA I *think* doubled it to 2K per kid under age 17, but only $1400 of each $2000 was refundable.

So here's how that works. If my tax liability after payments I made was $600, then $600 of a child CTC would cover that, and the remaining & 1400 was refundable as a check cut to me.

If I owed that same $600 but had 2 kids, I'd get the $1400 refunded, but for the second child, I would not get the full $2000 refunded, only $1400.

Making it both $3k AND fully refundable is huge for families, especially those of us with multiple children we can claim (we have a 5 and 2 year old).

 

Refundable credit = you get the money even if the credit is higher than your tax liability.
Nonrefundable credit = you can use the credit to reduce your tax liability but after your liability is zero, you get nothing more beyond that.

The child tax credit in its current form is not free money. It reduces the taxpayer's tax liability based on income and amount of children under 17. If your tax liability is already zeroed out, it is currently PARTIALLY a refundable credit. This plan will make it FULLY refundable.

 

What the fuck does Rubio even mean

 

Just asked my wife who follows significantly less politics than I do and she thought it was a new $2000 check

 

He's shitilly writing the following,

"c'mon uncle Joe, you know how this works! There's no way this load of Washington pork is gonna pass! Let's just make the checks for people a standalone bill and get money to people now!"

He's trying to be yang. But being Rubio, he phrases it even worse and comes off as a doofus.

 

My MAT group earlier today thought $2000 just as the current messaging.

 

"Pull the direct payments out of this bill because it'll look bad if I vote against the direct payments but I don't want to vote for the rest of the relief because I really hate helping people and the only reason I support the direct payments is not doing so will cost me my job"

 

A lot of people in this thread ready to not lodge a single complaint about the Biden administration’s policies for the next four years

 

Thank you for this answer. I see where you are coming from better now, but we fundamentally disagree on the intentions of the democrats using that term. I think it was deliberately misleading. Your version of how and why they are saying it is much more sympathetic than mine.

 

There’s already things to complain about. Unveiling $1400 checks is not one of them.

 

honestly this bill might be the high bar for what we can expect out of the Biden administration

 

Yes it is.

 

It’s been a year of little to no relief during a major economic crash and a pandemic, in the richest country on earth. Pretty fucking whack to not advocate for more money when you very clearly could be! Especially when we were told that if we just elect Dems, there would be real relief.

 

Personally am going to hound Biden on any and every single thing for the next four years, because he is and will continue to be completely inadequate.

 

I hope that in defending my assumption that they would be $1400 checks, people realize I'm not also defending the dollar amount. It's totally worth being pissed about the messaging and not getting more from democrats. I was only saying it was silly to call him a liar for this specific instance