COVID Relief

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee COVID Relief

Viewing 33 posts - 1 through 33 (of 33 total)
  • Author
  • #1915310
    Reb Eliezer

    Trump knows that the Republicans (being in a bubble) are against the relief, so he is for it.


    Both parties know that targeted Covid relief is needed for at least another 6-9 months but neither side wants to let the other take credit prior to the election so the nation suffers. I’m not sure either losing side will be anxious to help the other AFTER the results are known so we may still be at an impasse until after the inauguration. Even then, a split congress will make it difficult to find consensus.


    GH: targeted Covid relief is needed

    While there are lots of people suffering, it may be as important to establish what is not needed. So, this short break in government generosity may help to clarify where the need is actual. First stimulus was quickly and brilliantly executed but clearly went to lost of places where it was not needed.

    I was initially reading reports that $600+ payments are not distorting the market. Now I am reading that school buses can’t find drivers, they all quit either to Amazon or to unemployment.


    Always Ask: Note that I used the word “targeted” payments, NOT another multi-trillion dollar bailout for the world. Recent estimates indicate that up to 1/3 of the $3+ trillion bailouts went to individuals and corporations that didn’t need the money, didn’t really save jobs or to public entities for non-Covid related costs. Every sector of the economy has hired lobbyists claiming they are “essential” and want their share of the $$$. Even with zero interest rates, our country cannot afford to add trillions more to the national debt.


    GH, so we agree. I am saying that payments lapse, we will actually see who can not find a job, and who can. I am not saying this has to be done l’hathila, but at least the lobbyists will have less power.

    Reb Eliezer

    The president is crazy. After the Retrumpicans did everything to stop a bigger stimulus direct pwyment, he goes and blows the whole thing up by willing to veto the bill if tbey don’t agree to give a bigger payment.


    The relief bill is such a farce. After Democrats and Republicans spend months bickering over the bill, they finally agree that every family can have three weeks worth of groceries on the governments dime. And since everyone finally decided to agree on the bill, lawmakers and lobbyists used the opportunity to stuff it with tarfus. The bill is five thousand pages long and Congress was given a full two hours to read the text before they had to vote on it.


    “The bill is five thousand pages long”

    Most of that is simply the bill to fund all the government agencies. Do you want to shut down the government for weeks while people read the uninteresting details?


    To Yserbius: Don’t forget where the government gets its dimes.

    I would prefer relief that only goes to those who have no or low income or very limited savings, but in a democracy, imperfect bargains are part of government.

    As for Trump’s threatened veto, it is too little and way too late, and part of his scorched-earth tantrumitous exit plan.

    Reb Eliezer

    People need help and it is better to have a bird in the hand than two in the bush.


    >> bird in the hand

    I agree. Still, Congress allowed President to make this threat by passing the law less than 10 days before the end of Congress. They had months but some preferred that election damage to President is more important. Now, he is ruining their Nittel Nacht.

    Also, I would wait to judge one way or another before a story ends. Trump’s negotiating behavior is hard to predict. We just had 2 weeks of “why didn’t he buy more vaccines fro Pfizer”. Now, he did, using production capacity as a leverage. Maybe this will be signed, changed or re-submitted in 2 weeks.


    Every Trump supporter, and everyone still giving him the benefit of the doubt, needs to read this statement from Congressman Peter King:

    Let me state this as unequivocally as I can: Every item which President Trump objected to in the COVID Omnibus legislation was specifically requested by the Trump Administration! You got that: – EVERY item! That includes aid to Egypt, Pakistan, Burma, Sudan and Central America and funding for the Smithsonian.

    Additionally it was totally deceptive for the President to say that Congress failed to provide assistance to restaurants. The truth is that Congresswoman Grace Meng and I co-sponsored legislation to give direct grants to restaurants but the Trump Administration adamantly refused to assist restaurants.

    Believe me I don’t take any satisfaction in pointing out how wrong the President is. I have strongly supported the President and worked hard for his re-election. I am particularly indebted to him for his outstanding leadership in stopping MS-13’s killing rampage on Long Island, crushing the ISIS caliphate in the Middle East and standing with the Police.

    However when I saw the rabid, uninformed comments that were made attacking Republicans who voted for the legislation which President Trump supported and urged us to vote for, I felt compelled to set the record straight. And let me be clear the COVID legislation was negotiated by President Trump’s own Treasury Secretary. Every word was approved by the White House.

    The accompanying legislation implementing the President’s foreign policy and domestic programs were debated and approved by the respective Committees with zero objections from the White House. The White House also agreed to the bills being merged and voted on together.

    When the legislation passed, the Treasury Secretary said it was “the best birthday present” he could have gotten. It was later, almost 24 hours after the legislation had passed, that the President said the legislation was a “disgrace.”

    The only possible excuses for the President’s conduct is that he didn’t know what his own administration was doing or he panicked in the face of rabid attacks by yahoos on social media.
    For those of you who made the hysterical attacks on those Republicans who voted for the legislation advocated by President Trump: Did you really think that Kevin McCarthy and Lindsay Graham were part of the “swamp” or that Senators such as David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler were betraying President Trump? Did you even take a moment to think logically or are you incapable of intelligent thought? Or perhaps is your rage motivated by an insecurity which compels you to project your character defects on to others?

    If you had any strength of character or sense of moral integrity, you would realize how misguided and uninformed you were and you would apologize.

    I certainly don’t expect that and I really don’t care. All is know is that I acted honorably by voting for what President Trump requested and the overwhelming majority of Congress supported.
    As for those uninformed malcontents I will pray for them in the spirit of Christmas and Hanukkah.

    Merry Christmas! God Bless America!!


    Charlie: You are wasting your time seeking to respond on a rational basis to an irrational edited .  The regular government funding bill was combined with the Covid relief bill to assure that both would have the votes to pass both House and Senate. As you note, all the foreign aid funding was part of HIS original FY21 budget request submitted back in September. He is simply trying to find some reason to have the attention focused on him so he can claim credit for either an increased relief check or for even signing the original bill he threatened to veto. Fortunately, this choleria will be gone in 26 days. If people die because of his delaying this bill, I suspect Air Force One may just have to drop him in the Swamp (Everglades) on a long roundabout approach to West Palm Beach Airport since his neighbors have invoked his agreement never to use Mar a Lago for a permanent residence. At that time, we can all unite under the common theme of DRAIN THE SWAMP (and hopefully cheer as he goes down the proverbial drain).


    Charlie, without addressing this thing on the merits (I’ll wait until the story ends, so I don’t have to eat my virtual hat), I want to note two more firsts, this time by you, not by President Trump, even withi9n a quote (1) positive things that President done, (2) greating for a non-Jewish holiday. I commend you for sacrificing so much to fulfill the mitzva of quoting “b’shem omro”

    shavua tov


    I am /was a supporter a supporter of trump, what a immature little kindergartener to do what he did with the covid bill

    Republican Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania has a grim outlook for President Donald Trump’s legacy—should he ultimately veto a $900 billion stimulus package over his demand for higher direct payments and subsequently allow a government shutdown to commence
    “I understand he wants to be remembered for advocating for big checks,” Toomey said on Fox News Sunday. “But the danger is he’ll be remembered for chaos and misery and erratic behavior, if he allows this to expire.”

    Reb Eliezer

    Grabbing on too much, you end up grabbing on to nothing. $1200 would have been a good compromise.


    RE >> 1200 would have been a good compromise.

    this does make sense. But, unless you did more real estate and peace deals with Arabs than Trump, I would wait for an outcome. I am not saying it ain’t goin’ to be a disaster, I just withhold opinion.

    what do you think about Congress wisdom of net leaving themselves enough time to override a veto?
    did they get tired of scheming after all previous outrageous acts? I think if you start a year by ripping President’s speech on live TV, you should watch your back till the of the year.

    PS ripping the speech – seems like a curse that worked… the year indeed went in a totally different direction


    @Always ask questions
    Just catching up on this thread
    Nov 1, you wrote that they can’t find school bus drivers, they all left to Amazon or Unemployment.

    I don’t know where you live, but here in CT if you quit a job, you don’t collect. If you are called back (such as when in person school restarted) and refuse you no longer can collect.

    Unlike other states, no employee in CT contributes to Unemployment. Only the employer is taxed and the government also pays a share.


    So after trying to make a reality show over signing the Covid relief bill, the Trumpkopf just said he will sign it after making a fool of himself and Treasury Secretary Munchkin who negotiated the deal. Just 3 more weeks of this meshugaas before he is dragged out of the WH and shipped down to Florida where his neighbors have already gone to court to prevent him from moving in.


    So Trump signed the bill after all. All the Trump cult who had to turn 180 degrees after they supported the bill because Trump flipflopped last Monday now have to turn another 180 degrees back again. The disgrace is now a great success, as it was just a week ago. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

    Reb Eliezer

    Can someone explain to me what was the point? A person says to his friend, if you eat a half a frog, I give you a $100. He eats it and says, you know what, if you eat the other half, you don’t have to pay. They both end up eating a half a frog for nothing. Trump signed it anyway.


    >> Can someone explain to me what was the point

    Can’t fully explain, but it seems that there will be several votes next week on the raised issues. I am not even sure what is the next level of outrage and why I am replying.


    CTLawyer: here in CT if you quit a job, you don’t collect. If you are called back (such as when in person school restarted) and refuse you no longer can collect.

    I believe it is the same here. There may be something in union contracts. It also seems that employers, especially small ones, are reluctant reporting employees to the government. Not sure.
    There is better understanding now where the need for economic support is, so hopefully the moral hazard will be lower.

    Going forward, we should look at employment levels. If they start going down again as they did under Obama, then all partial statistics, like unemployment rate, will not reflect actual effect on population.

    Reb Eliezer

    The House approved the $2000 Stimulus Direct Payments.

    Reb Eliezer

    The senate must satisfy Trump’s personal interest to allow the $2000 relief bill.

    Reb Eliezer

    It is similar to be invited to a dinner and in the appetizer a poisoned pill is included which must be swallowed before the dinner or no dinner is served. The president agreed to look good to offer the $2000 stimulus knowing well that the Democrats will not agree to the pre-conditions he set.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Y.W. Editor.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Reb Eliezer.

    I know I’m a little late regarding this point, but in NY state if an employee quits to look for another job, then doesn’t find one, he can legally collect unemployment. The employer despite not having fired him and that their unemployment tax rate will increase because of it, is powerless to fight it.


    The key point that differentiates CT from other states is that no employee contributes to unemployment. ONLY the employer pays into the system.
    I always laughed when an employee told me they were entitled to collect because they had paid into the system.
    The employees in our NY and MA offices have unemployment tax deducted from their paychecks.


    The employer is not powerless to fight it. Apparently the employer was happy enough with performance to not have fired the employee. So, upon notification of the potential charge against employer’s experience ratio, the former employer offers the employee the old job. If the offer ios refused, the former employee loses benefits and former employer is not penalized.


    CTL >> If the offer is refused, the former employee loses benefits

    This is not easy to do for any sensitive position. So, you are getting unemployment claim from someone who just quit. You send him a job offer and he accepts it and comes back under duress. I would not want this employee in my office.

    Halachik aspect: we are supposed to treat employees with some leeway to make sure they do not feel enslaved (i.e. be not in control of himself and his time). For example, employees can leave on a spot and you are not supposed to force him work further. This offer essentially forces him to work.


    The former employee who quit, then loses new job and files for unemployment….
    You extend an offer of reemployment. His/her return would not be under duress. You were not unsatisfied with performance. You offer same level position as previous with same benefits. the return is not under duress.
    You are not chaining the former employee as a slave. Free to leave at any time, but not to cause you an increase in your unemployment tax rate, when not fired or laid off.

    BTW…back 40 years ago I was the Director of Personnel for a multi state manufacturing company (CT, NY, PA and SC). I protested many an unemployment claim that I considered unjust, unfair, etc. I attended the hearings. Most employers don’t show and the ex employee collects by default. I never lost a case.


    CTLawyer a special thanks to President Trump for the assistance.

    Reb Eliezer

    Thank Trump for the assitance of sedition for instigating protesters.

Viewing 33 posts - 1 through 33 (of 33 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.