r/PoursTea • u/Veshaad Timendi Causa Est Nescire • 25d ago

PoliticalTea 🗳️ Eventually something has to give...

Post image

The bill would provide a $3,000 direct payment to every person in households making $150,000 or less during its first year, which equals $12,000 for a family of four.

24.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

80

u/Big-Wrongdoer-965 25d ago

I appreciate the offer but I do t need a check. Just unfuck healthcare and social welfare programs.

26

u/TitShark 25d ago

Some of us need the check

3

u/PsionicKitten 24d ago

Actually effective and efficient social welfare programs (and healthcare!) for those in need, like you who claims they need a flat cash infusion, would be significantly more effective.

The red tape in the "fear of abuse" of it, social welfare is exceptionally difficult to navigate and obtain, especially for people who need it but have absolutely no clue how to even get started much less navigate the systems.

1

u/Casph0 24d ago

No they wouldn’t. Giving people money instead gets rid of administrative costs and let’s them choose for their own priorities more

1

u/Better-Nebula-6938 24d ago edited 24d ago

Giving people on welfare a flat check of 12k would most likely cause them to lose their welfare until they had ran through the money in a legitimate way. Section 8, food, stamps, and Obamacare all ask about your assest and income for the past 6 months(I think, not sure time frame). They all have level of assistance they will give based on how much you have and you're required by law to report when you received money over specific amounts.

Sure go ahead and give everyone money then watch which states revokes peoples assistance, prosecute people who didn't report it then have their walfare systems collapse from the hundreds of thousands trying to get it back

1

u/WaferResponsible4978 24d ago

It would certainly be conditioned on not counting as income if the goal is to help poor people. Did anyone get kicked off of unemployment when we got covid stimulus? Nobody I knew

1

u/Better-Nebula-6938 24d ago

No but it was 1,200 not 12k. Not counting it as income doesn't stop states from counting it as assets. Depending on state or assistance program your limits could be 10k for Medicare or 3k for foods stamps

1

u/Casph0 24d ago

I. My proposal gets rid of the vast majority of ‘welfare’ altogether. Instead of extensive anti-competitive programs with ridiculous administrative costs and bureaucracy, give people who are in need of support cash. Much more efficient

II. Even if my proposal was a joint program with welfare and checks, you could circumvent that by simply not having government checks count toward income.. that’s pretty easy man

1

u/Better-Nebula-6938 24d ago

Why would anyone work if government would just give you cash when you needed it? What encourages people to stock shelves at grocery stores, transport products from warehouses to stores, fix roads, or everything else that is needed for daily life? How are you proposing to make sure people don't abuses this free cash system. 12k a year wouldn't allow people enough to pay for rent, food, and utilities. What disabled people do to get more to survive? Who runs that program

1

u/WaferResponsible4978 24d ago

You explained why raising the ground floor is more effective, social service programs are designed to give randos the ability to decide who gets 0 help

1

u/Ange1ofD4rkness 24d ago

I remember a friend who needed disability and was struggling, I ended up referring them to another friend who had figured it all out, as it was the only way

2

u/c3p-bro 24d ago edited 24d ago

Get ready for general costs to rise $12k to compensate. 

Every time the government “subsidizes demand” that is the outcome. 100% of the time.

Did you all forget the massive immediate inflation that happened after the Covid “stimulus?” 

People on this site, I swear. Memories of goldfish and a child’s grasp of cause and effect.

10

u/Sausage_fingies 24d ago

Did you forget how the greatest era of prosperity under capitalism that America had ever seen was after the Great Depression when the government heavily taxed the ultra-wealthy and put that money into education, housing, and healthcare?

1

u/WaferResponsible4978 24d ago

You made the distinction yourself - "put that money into education, housing, and healthcare?"

You responded to someone saying "we shouldn't do flat checks, we should put that money into education, housing, and healthcare"

0

u/avalve 24d ago

Investing in public services is not the same as issuing a blank check to every American.

4

u/FeelDT 24d ago

You mean upgrading your truck or getting good school and universal healthcare… are you American or a communist?

-1

u/avalve 24d ago

What? I think the extra taxes should go to investing in social services. A blank check will just cause inflation like it did after the pandemic.

2

u/WaferResponsible4978 24d ago

Especially now that companies have fully embraced "whatever the market will bear" pricing after last time. It sucks how little (my fellow) progressives think about inflation. This specific lack of understanding of ours has been very successfully weaponized

1

u/FeelDT 24d ago

I am Canadian, i found it hilarious that you took that seriously…

1

u/avalve 24d ago

Oh. I thought you were MAGA judging by the downvotes I’m getting for saying that lmao.

0

u/Warmbly85 24d ago

Every tax historian that’s looked into the tax records say the idea that the ultra wealthy paid more in taxes when the top rate was 90% is bull shit. 

The best example is when the top rate was lowered the government actually generated more in taxes. 

3

u/superdino1234 24d ago

That’s not why that happened though. The inflation after Covid was due to over printing, not taxing billionaires.

1

u/c3p-bro 24d ago

Yes exactly, mass printing money a

5

u/JonnyOnThePot420 24d ago

Confidently incorrect! The stimulus checks were far smaller part of the bill! Almost all of that money was immediately spent, unlike the SBA loans or PPP.

1

u/Wise_Rip_1982 24d ago

Yea. And if the amount of money removed from the economy by way of tax increase is greater than what is distributed inflation should maintain or decrease slightly. Mmt is mighty.

0

u/EducatorReady1326 25d ago

It will be fine for a month then just turn dollars into pesos. Prices never go down when the government has a blank check. See student loans and healthcare via the subsidies

1

u/Yashema 24d ago edited 24d ago

It also wouldn't end scarcity. When you give money to people on the lower end of the income scale they spend it driving up demand for pretty much all middle class products, while richer people are way more likely invest their money. We saw this with Biden's 1.7 trillion COVID relief being responsible for around a 2%-3% rise in inflation (around 1/3 of the 9% that was experienced the first 2 years of the post-COVID recovery). Not only that the wealthy's money is somewhat imaginary with only a fraction being truly liquid. It's not like every trillionaire could just cash out. 

I'm not against taxing the rich, and heavily, but the money needs to be invested in the American people, not necessarily given to them.  

1

u/PaxPurpuraAKAgrimace 24d ago

Is there good data on the share of inflation attributable to “stimulus” checks?

2

u/Yashema 24d ago

MIT analysis from 2024 found up to 42% of inflation was caused by increased government spending, but this would include the initial stimulus passed under Trump. 

0

u/Poptatus_Ulvinga 24d ago

Something also to consider is the decline in labor participation rates. Handouts only make this selective employment worse.

-1

u/EducatorReady1326 24d ago

Yeah raise the floor

0

u/PipsqueakPilot 24d ago

If the government is writing checks the prices don't go down. Which is exactly why the government needs to take over large portions of the healthcare sector.

1

u/EducatorReady1326 24d ago

I was talking about the 12k checks

1

u/Lanky-Occasion-7486 24d ago

Because it's cheaper to be uninsured than insured...

0

u/bigchicago04 24d ago

Tf do student loans have to do with this?

2

u/EducatorReady1326 24d ago

Once anyone could get a loan for college, prices skyrocketed and now people have degrees for jobs that don’t pay enough to cover the payments

-1

u/BIGpoppaPUMP42069 25d ago

so completely collapse the global economy so you can get a check, got it

0

u/curiouscsplayer 24d ago

Then that's your problem stop blaming rich people

0

u/BasketOk5706 24d ago

Get a job if you want a check

1

u/TitShark 24d ago

Make all the assumptions you like, but you’re merely using classic low-effort arguments from too much propaganda.

0

u/Wooden_Mountain_6888 24d ago

Get a better education or better training and get a better job and you won’t be in that situation

-1

u/NICEMENTALHEALTHPAL 24d ago

Sucks to suck 

-1

u/Mike_Hauncheaux 24d ago

If health care got fixed and the social safety net strengthened, would you really?

1

u/Yearning_crescent 24d ago

Quadruple minimum wage and actually enforce monopoly laws and price gouging laws, racketeering. Ect. Alot of us would be doing better and wouldnt need it. 

1

u/Mike_Hauncheaux 24d ago

I don’t disagree in principle.

-5

u/SinningAfterSunset 25d ago

What happens when it's gone? You'll be back in debt in a year.

4

u/TitShark 25d ago

Do you know my personal money situation?

-2

u/SinningAfterSunset 25d ago

Well according to me you're making too much so you should give us less fortunate people a cut. I need someone to pay for my door dash, food is a human right you know.

1

u/TitShark 25d ago

👍

8

u/A_and_P_Armory 25d ago

Ya, remember “you can keep your doctor”? My wife just found out she can’t. But she can cash pay an office visit for $189. Or change to a marketplace plan that is $350/mo with the subsidies.

11

u/Relevant_Problem1935 25d ago edited 25d ago

If the entire system switched from private to federal. Then you absolutely could keep your doctor. No more networks to worry about. And I can say from experience having insurance is absolutely necessary. It's nice to be able to pay for a doctor visit once in awhile, but if something significant happens and you get $180,000 bill. Then you are screwed

1

u/LTsCantCook 25d ago

Sounds like the hospitals problem if I owe them 180k. I'll pay the $5 a month and let em sit on what's owed when I die.

2

u/Relevant_Problem1935 25d ago edited 24d ago

It'd be nice but they sue you and they garnish your wages or take your Social security etc. I had to file bankruptcy in 2017 because of a hospital debt. Took me about 8 years to recover from it. They will always get their money. Your best bet is getting on state insurance. Which every state has. Aka gov healthcare.

2

u/Ill_Lifeguard6321 25d ago

WVU medicine did this during Covid

1

u/LTsCantCook 25d ago

Fairly sure it depends on the state on what they can do.

-1

u/EducatorReady1326 25d ago

Dumb comment like yours almost had me defending healthcare in America not taking the bait though

0

u/Relevant_Problem1935 25d ago

Lol, ok kid.

-1

u/EducatorReady1326 24d ago

Kid would make you a little old to be making up stories. Bk is 10 years on a credit report which is next and garnishing social security is ridiculously hard to do and wouldn’t justify the cost for a creditor.

1

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago edited 24d ago

You don't know what you are talking about. I literally have first hand experience. Bye now

1

u/Ill_Lifeguard6321 25d ago

That’s part of the issue as well - they have high prices because of corporate greed and they need higher prices so they can charge insurance higher prices so that insurance charges those insured with higher prices. The capitalists wins! Idk about you, but I’d much rather health care CEOs get another bonus than be able to afford healthcare.

1

u/CaffeineJunkee 25d ago

The old “If I owe the bank $1,000 it’s my problem. If I owe the bank $1,000,000 it’s the bank’s problem”.

1

u/Maximum_Sandwich139 24d ago

You would get the doctor the federal/state government assigned you.

2

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago

The only thing that would change would be who pays for the services. Nothing else would have to change. The average family pays $571 dollars each month for employee sponsored health insurance. Thats that's $6,872 a year plus the deductable and copays. Thats well over $10,000 a year. Universal healthcare could easily cut that financial burden in half. Everyone would pay in out of their check for heath insurance just like they do for SSI. You can still buy private insurance even in countries like Canada or others. Every other Free market western democracy has universal healthcare. Except the United States. The only thing stopping us from having it are politicians and the insurance lobbies. The wealthy insurance giants spend millions every year to stop any chance universal healthcare has. Because wealthy people would be out of the job. The other infrastructure would all still stay in place. The only thing that changes is who collects the money and who pays the hospitals. It's a crime that we don't have it.

1

u/Maximum_Sandwich139 24d ago

Yeah no. 

1

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago

Yeah what do I know. I've only worked in the industry for the past 20 years. Before that worked for Optum financial services. The financial arm or United healthcare

1

u/Maximum_Sandwich139 24d ago

Awesome. I've had federal healthcare before and I wouldn't go back if you threatened me with exposure to powdered asbestos.

1

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago edited 24d ago

Depends on so many specifics. Because you would want universal healthcare. You were never on it before because it doesn't actually exist in the U.S. You were either on medicaid with is "state run insurance" which basically means your income met the level to have access to it and you would pay nothing out of pocket more or less. But because of the broken system we have you would not be able to always choose your hospital or doctor. Because only some take your insurance. Or you were on a state run managed health marketplace which depending on the state and your income can be garbage that offer terrible deductibles for pretty high costs and limited options. In my State we have much better systems than most. Those who live in the south for example are in terrible systems run by the state. If we had universal healthcare as many have argued for. You would not deal with what you have previously dealt with because the barriers you faced wouldn't exist anymore. Let me just say this. All of this is complex stuff and try to be open minded and give it a chance. Nobody should ever have to go bankrupt over healthcare. Healthcare should be a right. We are the only Democratic nation without universal healthcare. Have a good night sir.

2

u/Euphoric-Phrase-6415 24d ago

Is that better or worse than the one your insurance assigns you?

1

u/Maximum_Sandwich139 24d ago

Always worse. 

2

u/Euphoric-Phrase-6415 24d ago

How is it any different?

1

u/Iamnotapickle 24d ago

It is not nice to pay for a doctor visit.

0

u/BluebirdDazzling8179 24d ago

I had a 225,000 dollar something significant happen. I wasn't screwed at all. If your a responsible adult with half a brain you wouldn't let them government take care of you. They don't have a track record of being responsible with money at all.

1

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago

How were you not screwed with a 225,000 bill ? Let's hear it. What you said also doesn't make sense.

1

u/BluebirdDazzling8179 24d ago

Job, insurance. All I need to say.

1

u/Relevant_Problem1935 24d ago

I literally said if you don't have insurance you will be screwed. You then said how you weren't screwed because you had insurance. Which is saying exactly what I said in the first place.

1

u/BluebirdDazzling8179 24d ago

Don't let anyone agree with you whatever you do.

6

u/rjsquirrel 24d ago

That part of the ACA got rolled back in the years since. 3 guesses who had that on their agenda.

My insurance just changed their rules mid-plan year and kicked my doctor off their coverage. The insurance companies don’t give a flying fuck about us.

1

u/scuzzy987 24d ago

We need single payer multiple provider so the price is set and healthcare competes on outcomes. Maybe that wouldn't work because hospitals would only accept less sick patients like already happens with medicare. Something needs to reduce healthcare costs somehow

1

u/Ange1ofD4rkness 24d ago

No kidding. Used to have a family doctor it was like $25 a visit, blew up to I think it was $150

3

u/WeHaveArrived 24d ago

3k is like 2 unexpected car maintenance issues. Which for most people is huge. Needing new tires and having to come up with 1k+ sucks so hard.

1

u/Slumminwhitey 24d ago

Just turn the radio up the noise will go away.

3

u/CeruleanEidolon 24d ago

I wouldn't say no to a check. Unfucking healthcare and social programs is going to take a long time, and this would alleviate some of the pain that comes from it being perpetually fucked in the meantime. That's not even touching on how Republicans have fucked property taxes and the cost of housing, along with higher education forcing young adults to start their lives in debt they won't get out from under for decades.

Depriving the middle and lower classes of their spending power is not a recipe for a healthy lasting economy, but Republicans don't actually seem to care about that sort of thing anymore.

2

u/Decent_Group_2435 24d ago

Agreed. 12k for everyone? Price of everything just goes up. Get some universal healthcare in place and spend money on education and child services.

1

u/Big-Wrongdoer-965 24d ago

Education is a huuuuge one. I can appreciate all the “but I need a check now” sentiment. I get it. I was homeless not that long ago. But solving micro problems at an individual level won’t solve systemic issues this country has. One might save a handful of people the other has a much better chance of helping everyone- especially a education system

3

u/Beowulf1896 25d ago

I agree. It would cost $7k per capita to fix healthcare. That is what the most expensive single payer system pays. So once we tax the wealthy to do this, we can save what we currently pay. Do you want to guess? 12k per capita. Capitalistic medicine makes healthcare execs rich. It doesn't make the care affordable or effective.

3

u/mxzf 24d ago

We don't even need to tax the wealthy to do that. We already spend more than that on healthcare as-is, we just need to put the money towards single-payer healthcare instead of the current health insurance companies and the issue is solved with money to spare.

But people blanch at the idea of a "tax" despite already paying more in "premiums".

1

u/Beowulf1896 24d ago

Are you saying that according to the math, we could switch to single payer and then pay the same amount on healthcare and tax the billionaires 2% less? Our oligarch overlords would be pleased!

Or if we wanted to still pay $12k per capita, we could provide care for every one else in North America, and Central America, and half of South America without any of them paying into the system.

Alternatively, like you actually suggested, provide an extra $5k per adult in lower taxes. I love it. It would not help me (I got health care AND the money to use it), but I would 100% support it.

1

u/Casph0 24d ago

The $12k per capita figure is over a 10 year span. The $7k per capita figure is (I’m assuming) annual. So you would have to raise ≈5x as much actually 🫠

1

u/Beowulf1896 24d ago

The 12k per capita from taxing billionaires? Okay. Sounds great. The healthcare costs are still better for songle payer.

1

u/Casph0 24d ago

Over 10 years. It’s a pretty small amount given all the negative tradeoffs

1

u/Beowulf1896 24d ago

What negative trade offs?

1

u/mxzf 24d ago

We're already spending upwards of $14k/capita on healthcare in the US as-is; nobody else in the world hits $10k (2024 numbers, since that's what I found quickly, but the point is clear).

Most countries handle the job with $5-8k/capita in healthcare expenses, and the US certainly isn't proportionally healthier than those countries to justify the extra money spent. That money's going into company profits, not healthcare.

1

u/Casph0 24d ago

Yes that’s because of a multitude of anti-competitive policies such as employer deductions, liscencing requirements, capital requirements etc which allow medical service providers to price their services exorbitantly high

1

u/mxzf 24d ago edited 24d ago

You mean the things that single-payer healthcare run by the government, rather than for-profit companies, would fix? Yeah.

All of the things driving up healthcare costs are either policies that the companies themselves are implementing or regulatory capture, nothing that couldn't be fixed with proper government regulations and a single-payer system that is intended to keep the population of the country healthy rather than to line the pockets of the insurance CEOs.

1

u/[deleted] 24d ago

You give the healthcare system that money and next year the price will have doubled.

1

u/Beowulf1896 24d ago

If you let them be capitalists. Capitalism doesn't create good products on non fungible goods. Imagine if your entire water supply was controlled not by the government but by a private company that had a duty to maximize share holder value. They'd aim for making water barely drinkable by government standards and charge you as much as you can afford since we don't live long without water. Same story with some health care. I can live without glasses, but not without metformin.

That is why nearly every first world country has government control over healthcare. Take the UK. They have similar if not better outcomes and pay about 60% of what we pay. We should just copy our neighbors homework. The UK has the second most expensive per capita healthcare. USA is first.

1

u/CPD_MD_HD 25d ago

What an abysmal failure Obamacare has been. The only good thing about it is the fact that kids can be covered as young adults up to the age of 27 or 26, whichever it is when it ends.

2

u/PipsqueakPilot 24d ago

Having an ACA plan saved my eyesight and reduced a 5 day hospital stay and ER visit to a 1k bill.

Thanks Obama.

1

u/henningknows 25d ago

Agreed. And pay down the debt while you are at it, that shit is a ticking time bomb that no politician are taking seriously

2

u/Professional_Tap_343 24d ago

And pay down the debt while you are at it, that shit is a ticking time bomb that no politician are taking seriously

And why would they? They are all to busy grabbing as much$$ as they can while they can. They will bankrupt this country and as we fall into the dark ages. They will be on a private jet to fiji. All the while congratulating themselves forkeeping the ship afloat for as long as they did.

We are in the ending stage(s) of capitalism either the rich will flee once they've gutted us for ever last dime, we have another civil war/revolution event, or we submit to our billionaire overlords and they strip mine areas into sections they control as we fall into techno feudalism. Example bezos/amazon will control nj/pa/delaware and anyone in the zone will work for company scrip like amazon swag bux. Project 2025 even points to this as an end goal for them.

1

u/GummBuh 25d ago

A lot of people just need a check dawg, this would help a lot of people get that push out of homelessness

0

u/Any-Turn1907 24d ago

Just like those Covid stimulus checks did, right dawg? People didn’t just blow the money and end up in more debt, right dawg?

1

u/newaccount252 24d ago

Imagine if there was 150milion people with that type of thinking.

1

u/Upstairs_Refuse_2830 24d ago

How dare you not want more inflation? You don’t want gas to cost $12?!

1

u/ntkwwwm 24d ago

Yeah I’ll take this guy’s check since he doesn’t want it.

1

u/MeanHurry8664 24d ago

As long as you spend it, it only does good

1

u/DaaaahWhoosh 24d ago

I swear, I don't follow Sanders (because why would I, he's not running for an office I can vote on) so I can't confirm, but I keep seeing these sorts of "Sanders vows to armwrestle Satan to give every American an ice cream cone" posts and I can't imagine they're real, or if they're real they must be political theatre. Like sure ice cream is good but you're not gonna win against Satan and even if you do, why did you put so much effort into something that's gonna melt before it even gets to the people who need it, while still leaving the rest of the system broken?

1

u/Born_Jacket_9892 24d ago

I agree Bernie isnt gonna do anything.

1

u/Skhemattos 24d ago

I never get a chance to share this: Katie Goodman, the "unfucker" song https://youtu.be/Sdn3O6aaMNc?is=l87Nn1af7xbbnx20

1

u/This_isR2Me 24d ago

Believe it or not, it's not always about just you.

1

u/Big-Wrongdoer-965 24d ago

I’m not saying it for me. There is piles of data showing that direct payments rarely raise people from poverty. Most folks are a paycheck away from ruin, and extra few grand isn’t going to fix that. This would a be a micro solution (that won’t fix anything) for a macro problem. You want to really benefit people with huge tax windfall…. Invest in the systems that create support. You’re not gonna raise everyone up with a stimulus check. But we can sure as hell catch everyone from falling by fixing our welfare and healthcare programs

1

u/This_isR2Me 24d ago

The me 20 yrs ago would believe and agree with you. But clearly times are changing. Not to mention that scamming welfare programs is literally a business model. I live in the Midwest and let me tell you it wasn't and isn't just the somali community that organizes payouts to people saying they are receiving services. Just the other day my father was telling me about this place his friends and acquaintances go to to get their checks, hang out, have fun in their retirement (not what their declared function is)

And then just look at the collosal failure in California with their homeless and healthcare problem, how many multi millionaires popped up riding that gravy train? One is more than is acceptable. At least if you give it directly, whatever they do with it is their own responsibility. These white knight politics are evidently ineffective on a broad scale.

1

u/BasementChimp1 24d ago

Speak for yourself, I really fucking need it

1

u/totashi777 24d ago

Both? Both

1

u/its-amadeus 24d ago

Holy keep that opinion to yourself🙄Insufferable. Lots of Americans absolutely need it and don't have the luxury of being so privileged

1

u/smurfnation 24d ago

Yeah cutting everyone a $12k check will just cause more inflation. If they could do either monthly payments over a couple years or ease our tax burden for a couple years, I would prefer that

1

u/Saurian42 24d ago

Up the tax to 7% and we can have both. Also likely universal higher education as well. Frack them billionaires.

1

u/7153345666 24d ago

Checks aren’t the answer. Increased social services are better.

1

u/pink_faerie_kitten 24d ago

Why not both?

1

u/toaster_stroodle69 24d ago

Good for you, no one asked.

1

u/Big-Wrongdoer-965 24d ago

You should prob delete Reddit. Might be typing that a lot.

1

u/TruPengu 24d ago

I’ll take yours please, thanks. It’ll really help me get my necessities together and pay off my debt

1

u/nunyabizburna 24d ago

why not both

-1

u/OldFalcon250 25d ago

Going to need a whole lot more than 4.4 trillion for that my guy

3

u/Gussie-Ascendent 25d ago

Healthcare would actually save money

0

u/OldFalcon250 24d ago

32 trillion every ten years—that’s what the us government needs to float healthcare alone

So when you say healthcare saves money I have no clue what your talking about