Right now-- they are in no hurry to pass further stimulus packages because the stock market is doing fabulous. They don't care that there are people who will be getting evicted with the haste as soon as eviction moratoriums are lifted. In fact, that's an even bigger reason to avoid further stimulus-- those who normally blow it on consumer goods will likely spend it on bills instead-- in order to stay afloat. Which.... defeats the purpose of a stimulus.
Originally Posted by Grace Preston
Not necessarily. Even if people use some of their stimulus money to pay down outstanding bills, that still frees up spending power for future consumption.
Originally Posted by lustylad
"Frees up spending power for future consumption"
Yeah-- its pretty apparent that you've never been truly poor. The rest I won't acknowledge because it requires me to reveal more personal information than I'm comfortable with doing on a SHMB.
Originally Posted by Grace Preston
Again, if Pelosi had removed language from her bill that favored Democratic politicians and Democratic constituencies and been willing to pass something targeted just towards helping the unemployed and people behind on their rent, the money would be in place to help people who need helping.
Lusty writes like an economist, probably because he is an economist. What he's saying doesn't look controversial to me -- if you distribute enough money to people so they can pay the bills they owe, and not get evicted from their houses or have their electricity off, and then some extra for "future consumption", then that will help them and provide a boost to the economy.