YES!!! I would 1000% support a bailout of people at lower income brackets who actually need it rather than people who live decadently and are whining about bills that they voluntarily took on that they 1000% can afford to pay back. Why is this so hard of a position for people to get?
YES!!! I would 1000% support a bailout of people at lower income brackets who actually need it rather than people who live decadently and are whining about bills that they voluntarily took on that they 1000% can afford to pay back. Why is this so hard of a position for people to get?
It comes down to household income once you talk about married individuals. For example, an individual making $85k/year married to someone making $35k/year is a $120k/year household, but an individual making $85k/year married to an individual making $75k/year is now an in an $160k/year household.
On the household side, the cap should have been lowered to something like households making $140k and on the individual side probably closer to individuals making $65k in today's economy. Going up to $250k/household and $125k/individual was just a bonkers cash-for-rich-kids bailout program. When you mix the bailout for the working class in with the bailout for the rich kids, you water down the notion that this isn't about bailing out the nation's most privileged children. In fact, you're making it look like it *is* about bailing out the rich kids out with that kind of upper limit, and everyone else who came in below them was just riding onto the coat tails of the rich kids getting bailed out.
YES!!! I would 1000% support a bailout of people at lower income brackets who actually need it rather than people who live decadently and are whining about bills that they voluntarily took on that they 1000% can afford to pay back. Why is this so hard of a position for people to get?
Is there someone specific you are thinking of who "live decadently" and are whiners?? Who are these people you are referring to?
It comes down to household income once you talk about married individuals. For example, an individual making $85k/year married to someone making $35k/year is a $120k/year household, but an individual making $85k/year married to an individual making $75k/year is now an in an $160k/year household.
On the household side, the cap should have been lowered to something like households making $140k and on the individual side probably closer to individuals making $65k in today's economy. Going up to $250k/household and $125k/individual was just a bonkers cash-for-rich-kids bailout program. When you mix the bailout for the working class in with the bailout for the rich kids, you water down the notion that this isn't about bailing out the nation's most privileged children. In fact, you're making it look like it *is* about bailing out the rich kids out with that kind of upper limit, and everyone else who came in below them was just riding onto the coat tails of the rich kids getting bailed out.
Very good sir. We'll see how it all shakes out as a lawsuit has been filed by someone in Indiana I believe.