Jump to content

Do you need to vent about things COVID-19?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 82 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, FairreLilette said:

There were enough places for it to been seen to sign into the appropriate IRS website to get a check.  People just didn't want to do it.  There are American's who don't like "Big Brother" government plus many people don't want to give out their address to "Big Brother".  It's sometimes considered redneck thinking" but not always.  I don't know exactly what it is but some people just would not sign onto the IRS website to secure their check.  

But, anyhow...going forward...perhaps a code placed into our number for county and state is something that should be done.  It's weird and amazing how they just sent out so many checks at once though.  

But, California needing FEMA assistance is a different story but my government has been making me literally ill from stress with their mis-handling of real dire situations in my home state.  We have to have federal assistance and a state of emergency must be declared.  FEMA has the power to issue checks the same day.  I know, I received a check the morning of the 1994 Northridge earthquake in California.   

They had more than their fair share of people going to claim their checks that did not get them..

I live in Tennessee, I don't know anyone that was thinking like that when it was time for them to sign into the IRS site..

That sounds more like media jargan than anything putting that lack of trust in government just on one group.. Anyone that has their taxes done or does their own taxes signs in there every year.. hehehe

I think you'll find plenty of people that don't trust the government on both sides of the isle and in the middle, in ghetto's and on reservations and in the suburbs or where ever.... Rednecks don't own that alone..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

*****ing *****ed up mother *****ers are *****ing the whole *****ing *****ed up ****sucking *****head *****s. And then some.

Cutting in with a rando side comment because I haven’t kept up - I’m tired of all the conspiracy theories behind it, and all the Americans on my feeds (note: I am also an American) pointing fingers at

Welp y'all have been warned before about keeping this thread on topic but it continues to delve into Politics and other off topic subjects. So consider this thread closed. If something similar is star

Posted Images

I'm not sure that identifying recipients of a stimulus check by county and state would do any good, and I think it would make it even more difficult to get the legislators to agree on dollar amounts, if they were going to be different amounts for different parts of the country  (especially when there is so much blue state/red state garbage going with federal politics these days).

I do think that part of the stimulus check is for stimulating the economy - to have people out spending that extra money - to help keep up out of a recession or depression, and to that extent sending it out to people based on an overall income level makes sense to me.   The stimulus check was one part of legislation to help a wide range of individuals and small businesses, and I do agree more needs to be done in that area, especially for those that had been employed in segments of the economy which may have a long recovery time, such as tourism related jobs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MoiraKathleen said:

I'm not sure that identifying recipients of a stimulus check by county and state would do any good, and I think it would make it even more difficult to get the legislators to agree on dollar amounts, if they were going to be different amounts for different parts of the country  (especially when there is so much blue state/red state garbage going with federal politics these days).

But, in California we are not even in stimulus though is what I am saying.  This is survival money and many speakers have spoken about it to our federal government that this is not stimulus - it is survival money.

Because of the delay for the stimulus which was changed btw to the Covid Relief Bill because of the fact many ARE NOT in stimulus territory yet, Californians lost over a week in unimployment benefits.  Below is the median income for Californians.  I'd say almost everyone I know fall a bit below that at about $25-26 dollars an hour but that is close enough to the stats for me to say the below is pretty darn accurate.  So, we don't have any stimulus here.  Nor do others who are behind due to their own lockdowns.  

As of Dec 21, 2020, the average annual pay for an Average in California is $62,356 an year. Just in case you need a simple salary calculator, that works out to be approximately $29.98 an hour. This is the equivalent of $1,199/week or $5,196/month.
 
Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

As of Dec 21, 2020, the average annual pay for an Average in California is $62,356 an year. Just in case you need a simple salary calculator, that works out to be approximately $29.98 an hour. This is the equivalent of $1,199/week or $5,196/month.

That doesn't really have anything to do with COVID.  That figure is only down slightly from the 2019 figure of $71,361 per year.

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

This is survival money and many speakers have spoken about it to our federal government that this is not stimulus - it is survival money.

I won't disagree that for many the stimulus is survival money.  However, a one time stimulus check (or even a 1 or 2 times a year check) is not going to provide week to week, month to month survival needs - that needs to be done through enhanced unemployment with longer periods of eligibility times and other benefit programs that help those directly in need of help with rent, food, utilities and other necessities, probably at a State or Local level, with Federal government help in funding.   

The flexibility in the unemployment offerings last Spring were really helpful to some members of my family - my sister who has worked as a contractor in an industry that was decimated by the lockdowns and may not recover for quite awhile, was able to get unemployment, and my daughter was able to reduce working hours (but get unemployment for those hours) so that she could be home more with her kids for their remote schooling.   It would be nice to have extensions for those types of enhancements, plus the extra dollars that were being added in to the weekly benefits.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

That doesn't really have anything to do with COVID.  That figure is only down slightly from the 2019 figure of $71,361 / year.

No, you missed the whole point here...unemployment benefits lapsed while California has been in strict lockdown so there is no "stimulus"...this is COVID RELIEF money, not stimulus, not in California.   (Sorry the font is big - I copied it from a headline.)

‘We’re already too late’: Unemployment lifeline to lapse even with an aid deal

Even if lawmakers enact an extension of emergency unemployment programs ahead of the Dec. 31 cut-off, lags in programming for antiquated state systems will still cause missed checks for the scores who rely on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Anyone that has their taxes done or does their own taxes signs in there every year.. hehehe

No, that's not true.  On IRS.gov website it says 8 out of 10 "sign in there".  lol  Not all.  That's why there were so many adverts for people to do so..."sign in there" to get their check.  Plus, disabled, railroad retirees and lots of others have direct deposit too.  It is that missing 2 out of 10 people, not known why they didn't "sign in there".  Whether it was the old fashioned "redneck thinking" thinkers or not...all I can say is I have no idea who wouldn't want too.  

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

No, that's not true.  On IRS.gov website it says 8 out of 10 "sign in there".  lol  Not all.  That's why there were so many adverts for people to do so..."sign in there" to get their check.  Plus, disabled, railroad retirees and lots of others have direct deposit too.  It is that missing 2 out of 10 people, not known why they didn't "sign in there".  Whether it was the old fashioned "redneck thinking" thinkers or not...all I can say is I have no idea who wouldn't want too.  

I was talking about people that do their own taxes or have their taxes prepared for them that sign in there every year..

8  out of the 10 are probably the ones doing their taxes every year..

just about any tax programs tells you to check into the web site.. Anyone that has a tax return coming, that's where they go to check..

That's where a tax filer communicates with the IRS about their filing.

I didn't say that every person getting a stimulus check signs in there every year.. hehehe

My main point was, you had plenty that signed into the system and used the system, that didn't get their checks and will have to get the benefits at tax time and those that didn't get them until late into the year..

 

Edited by Ceka Cianci
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2020 at 11:06 AM, Coffee Pancake said:

Well, you obviously got no further than the headline.

The Nightingale hospitals are in mothballs / being asset stripped as for some reason the NHS have been unable to staff them. 

Hospitals require a considerable amount of staff before they become even minimally viable.

The plan to use them failed because of HR constraints not because the virus isn't overwhelming the NHS.

 

This would have been obvious if you had taken 5 seconds to check the first information source cited.

 

Everything you ever wanted to know about covid 19 but were to afraid to ask

Edited by iceing Braveheart
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FairreLilette said:

No, that's not true.  On IRS.gov website it says 8 out of 10 "sign in there".  lol  Not all.  That's why there were so many adverts for people to do so..."sign in there" to get their check.  Plus, disabled, railroad retirees and lots of others have direct deposit too.  It is that missing 2 out of 10 people, not known why they didn't "sign in there".  Whether it was the old fashioned "redneck thinking" thinkers or not...all I can say is I have no idea who wouldn't want too.  

It might actually be the people who don't need to check the website for any reason.  Older people who don't use the internet?  My mother sure doesn't log in there.  Red neck thinking?  I don't think so.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RowanMinx said:

It might actually be the people who don't need to check the website for any reason.  Older people who don't use the internet?  My mother sure doesn't log in there.  Red neck thinking?  I don't think so.  

Yea, there were some people that didn't have to do anything but wait.. I think people on social security didn't have to sign in, but could still go there to check on if it was being processed or not..

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ceka Cianci said:

Yea, there were some people that didn't have to do anything but wait.. I think people on social security didn't have to sign in, but could still go there to check on if it was being processed or not..

 

Exactly, not everyone who files taxes logs onto the IRS website.  No conspiracy, no red neck thinking, they just don't need to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FairreLilette said:

No, you missed the whole point here...unemployment benefits lapsed while California has been in strict lockdown so there is no "stimulus"...this is COVID RELIEF money, not stimulus, not in California.   (Sorry the font is big - I copied it from a headline.)

The Dec 31st expiration though is not just for California (though was that date actually the end of the month or a couple of days ago?).  Anyway, it is for the whole country.  So I still don't understand why you think California folks should either get more money or get priority on the money (not sure which you are asking for).

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Exactly, not everyone who files taxes logs onto the IRS website.  No conspiracy, no red neck thinking, they just don't need to.

That and it's probably less than 8 out of 10 people that even have to deal with the irs or taxes at all..

a lot of people don't work and a lot are in school..then you have all those getting paid under the table that never file..

There is a lot of people that got checks coming to them that probably never even seen that site.. hehehe

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

The Dec 31st expiration though is not just for California (though was that date actually the end of the month or a couple of days ago?).  Anyway, it is for the whole country.  So I still don't understand why you think California folks should either get more money or get priority on the money (not sure which you are asking for).

I've tried to explain it to you.  Lockdown, unable to go to work....loss of income and showed you what the weekly income is in California.   See the system shut down when the unemployment ended and has to be restarted so there will be a lapse with no unemployment.  And, I said California and other lockdown states need more and this is not stimulus money, it is survival money...partly because of the lapse or the gap before payments may restart.  As far as what is going on in all other states, I have no idea.  There is not enough time to read news 24/7.  Some articles site delays due to antiquated systems in order to get the programs restarted again.  

*************

The week ended Dec. 26 is the last one that benefits can be paid since unemployment is paid out weekly, according to experts, unless the legislation becomes law.

Even if Trump signs the legislation this week, it will take two to three weeks on average for most state unemployment agencies to reprogram their computers, Evermore estimates. 

"State agencies are freaking out," Evermore says. "In theory, Congress could make this retroactive, but it will take states weeks before they get things up and running. Not only will people not get a check for next week, but the following few weeks will be delayed as well."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/12/27/stimulus-checks-unemployment-benefits-trump-covid-relief-package/4050133001/

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iceing Braveheart said:

But all the examples in that link are in lobbies, outside in the car park or in corridors, so the nurses might not even be on shift at that time. I agree it'd be vile if they were dancing around the patients or when they were supposed to be working, but they may be getting ready for their shift or have just come off it.

I couldn't do that job for a week, so I won't criticise how they let off steam. And nobody criticises the police for doing TikToks (I'm not saying people should btw)...

Though personally, I'm not sure how I feel about them putting it online. Even without COVID, I'd be upset if a loved one died in an ICU and I then saw nurses dancing in the same ward. But they are people too, not robots, and that link seems a bit biased IMO. 

Edited by Rat Luv
I don't know much about American hospitals but have family who work for NHS and nurses can't just start dancing on wards during their shifts!
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Lockdown, unable to go to work....loss of income and showed you what the weekly income is in California.   See the system shut down when the unemployment ended and has to be restarted so there will be a lapse with no unemployment.  And, I said California and other lockdown states need more and this is not stimulus money, it is survival money...partly because of the lapse or the gap before payments may restart. 

And what I'm telling you is that half the country is in this situation.   

I do not believe the Federal government needs to give out more - at least not until the states themselves have upped their ante by quite a bit.  

Regardless, the Feds are not going to give out any money to anyone until it is all approved.  And then, IMO, there is nobody that deserves it any faster than anyone else.  Half the country is in lockdown of various stages and unemployment is running out or has run out for most folks that have lost their jobs due to Covid.

California is truly no more special than any other state and, despite you living in your own little bubble, they are no worse off financially than many, many other places.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

And what I'm telling you is that half the country is in this situation.   

I do not believe the Federal government needs to give out more - at least not until the states themselves have upped their ante by quite a bit.  

Regardless, the Feds are not going to give out any money to anyone until it is all approved.  And then, IMO, there is nobody that deserves it any faster than anyone else.  Half the country is in lockdown of various stages and unemployment is running out or has run out for most folks that have lost their jobs due to Covid.

California is truly no more special than any other state and, despite you living in your own little bubble, they are no worse off financially than many, many other places.

I'm not saying we are special at all.  The only stay-at-homes and other restrictions I've heard first for New York and then California.  No other press came through my news stream about any other states.  Just following California is more than enough to keep up on that I lost track on New York weeks ago.  

As to whether, the Feds need to give out more money...with a lapse in unemployment benefits which could be a few weeks, $600 is not going to help anyone.  I mentioned California because it would seem easier to do it via a whole state rather than a case-by-case basis.  Being at minus 0% emergency care here in California is a very dire situation.  But, you seem to be upon a high horse about being a champion of the no money crusade.  

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Half the country is in lockdown of various stages 

No, it's not.  Most have very loose restrictions.   Link is below to read it all.  But, your statement here is absolutely false.  Most have curfews and masks.  

Restrictions tighten in Mississippi

Updated Dec. 27, 2020

Gov. Tate Reeves announced that a new executive order will require residents in more Mississippi counties to wear masks and follow other new guidelines Dec. 9. In total, 61 Mississippi counties will now be under the new order, which began Dec. 11 and will remain in effect until Jan. 15. Under the new order, sports venues have been further limited. The new order states indoor venues must now limit themselves to four spectators per student or a maximum of 250 ticketed spectators, depending on the size of the arena. Other indoor sports arenas will be limited to 10% seating capacity or 1,000 attendees, whichever is lower. Reeves had announced an executive order Dec. 1 that put 54 of the state's 82 counties under stringent COVID-19 requirements, including mask mandates and a 10-person limit on indoor gatherings when social distancing isn't possible and a 50-person limit at outdoor events. Businesses can remain open provided they operate in a limited capacity and adhere to guidelines issued by the Mississippi Department of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, he said. All private and public social gatherings are limited to 10 people while indoors and 50 people outdoors.

Stay-at-home order: Started April 3, 2020; ended on May 11, 2020

Affected sectors: Retail, Restaurants

Caseload: The number of confirmed new cases is shrinking, with 12,341 for the seven days ending December 29 compared to 14,391 the seven days prior.

Mobility: For the seven days ending Dec. 25, 2020, the share of residents leaving their homes was about 2.37% less than the seven days prior, data from SafeGraph show.

Read more: https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2020/12/09/coronavirus-ms-reeves-extends-mandate-more-counties/3868404001/

OKLAHOMA

Restrictions tighten in Oklahoma

Updated Dec. 27, 2020

Gov. Kevin Stitt detailed new limits on public gatherings and indoor sporting events. Gatherings such as weddings, funerals and parties are limited to 50% capacity. Attendance at indoor youth sporting is limited to four spectators per participant or 50% of building capacity. Since Nov. 19, bars and restaurants must adhere to a nightly 11 p.m. curfew, except for to-go and drive-thru orders. Bars and restaurants are required to close by 11 p.m., with no in-person food or alcohol served afterwards.

Stay-at-home order: Never issued

Affected sectors: Cosmetology, Health

Caseload: The number of confirmed new cases is shrinking, with 18,161 for the seven days ending December 29 compared to 23,629 the seven days prior.

Mobility: For the seven days ending Dec. 25, 2020, the share of residents leaving their homes was about 0.48% more than the seven days prior, data from SafeGraph show.

SOUTH CAROLINA

Restrictions unchanged in South Carolina

Updated Dec. 27, 2020

Gov. Henry McMaster's office said Nov. 7 it has no plans to enact any new statewide restrictions. South Carolina restaurants can now operate at full capacity inside their dining rooms, as of Oct. 2. Residents of South Carolina's nursing homes and assisted-living facilities are able to visit with their loved ones again — but only outside — under guidelines. Movie theaters, arenas, stadiums and other large venues throughout South Carolina can reopen with severe restrictions.

Stay-at-home order: Started April 7, 2020; ended on May 12, 2020

Affected sectors: Retail, Restaurants

Caseload: The number of confirmed new cases is growing, with 22,547 for the seven days ending December 29 compared to 20,735 the seven days prior.

Mobility: For the seven days ending Dec. 25, 2020, the share of residents leaving their homes was about 2.86% less than the seven days prior, data from SafeGraph show.

Read more: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2020/11/06/sc-governor-henry-mcmaster-silent-rising-covid-19-cases/6185725002/

NORTH CAROLINA

Restrictions tighten in North Carolina

Updated Dec. 27, 2020

Gov. Roy Cooper instituted a modified stay-at-home order Dec. 8, which includes a curfew between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. It will remain in place until Jan. 8. Cooper on Nov. 23 unveiled a new executive order strengthening the state's existing mask mandate and adding provisions for law enforcement to cite people who aren't wearing face coverings as the order requires as well as businesses or organizations failing to enforce the requirement.

Stay-at-home order: Started March 30, 2020; ended on May 8, 2020

Affected sectors: Retail, Entertainment

Caseload: The number of confirmed new cases is shrinking, with 35,377 for the seven days ending December 29 compared to 42,301 the seven days prior.

https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/coronavirus-reopening-america-map/

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this back and forth on who should or shouldn't have gotten stimulus payments and I'm sitting here wondering why it is that SSI (and similar) program recipients are forced to make do on less than minimum wage each month.

So yeah .... As far as I am concerned, ya'll can take your concerns over Stimulus distribution and stow them.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

All this back and forth on who should or shouldn't have gotten stimulus payments and I'm sitting here wondering why it is that SSI (and similar) program recipients are forced to make do on less than minimum wage each month.

So yeah .... As far as I am concerned, ya'll can take your concerns over Stimulus distribution and stow them.

Two wrongs don't make a right though.

And, reading that state by state restrictions above, most states have bars which need to close by 10 or 11 p.m.   Oh, poor babies. That is ridiculous!   That is not out of work across the board closures like in California where businesses are closed completely.  For many, this is survival money not stimulus money during a possible several week funding gap with $600 hundred dollars to live on.  And, even if people could take out a second mortgage or get a loan, the banks are closed.  Do you see why it's survival money?   There have been people speaking to those in Washington to open their dam eyes.  Well, they did change the name to the Covid Relief Bill but it's a joke as it stands now.  

I've also heard Biden wants to raise social security recipients by a few hundred dollars and it's about time that happens.  

Edited by JanuarySwan
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, JanuarySwan said:

Two wrongs don't make a right though.

And, reading that state by state restrictions above, most states have bars which need to close by 10 or 11 p.m.   Oh, poor babies. That is ridiculous!   That is not out of work across the board closures like in California where businesses are closed completely.  For many, this is survival money not stimulus money during a possible several week funding gap with $600 hundred dollars to live on.  And, even if people could take out a second mortgage or get a loan, the banks are closed.  Do you see why it's survival money?   There have been people speaking to those in Washington to open their dam eyes.  Well, they did change the name to the Covid Relief Bill but it's a joke as it stands now.  

I've also heard Biden wants to raise social security recipients by a few hundred dollars and it's about time that happens.  

All of that is well and good - it does not change much and makes a few assumptions concerning my quoted response.

That response boils down to the following: My personal take is that arguments/discussions over who should and should not be getting the payments are empty/meaningless. Up until this pandemic and crisis hit, anyone unable to work was being treated as though we do not matter. Pardon me if I'm a bit less sympathetic than you'd like.

The initial payment was one month's worth of Federal mandated Minimum Wage, rounded up - more than anyone unable to work (for any reason) sees each month. That payment should not have been one-time either - it should have continued to come in for the entire duration of the pandemic crisis.

The entire safety net (Social Security Et Al.) needs an overhaul - that is the bottom line. As it stands right now, a rather large portion of the country is finally having their eyes opened.

I'll not be holding my breath in anticipation of that supposed increase, by the by.

ETA: Also, yes it most certainly is a "Stimulus" - it is a second, one time payment. A proper relief/survival program would be paying out that same, month's worth of Minimum Wage rounded up, for the entire duration of the pandemic.

Further, I specifically mentioned and targeted the One Time payment - not the Unemployment Benefits (which were themselves a joke at the amounts paid out).

With that, you either understand what I've said thus far ... or you don't. Either way, I'm not here to discuss/argue.

Happy New Year.

Edited by Solar Legion
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, iceing Braveheart said:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/joeydurso/coronavirus-agenda-21-5g

i am unfamiliar with buzz feed but do you think that will come true?

No...not really. I think it's more likely that the big threat to us all will be drought and food shortages.

If the UN was trying to kill half the population why would they even allow the TikToks to be seen, which would expose them? And if a doctor tricks me with the vaccine and actually injects me with a microchip so I can be part of a new cashless society, what's the point if I don't know I can pay with my finger? :S

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Rat Luv said:

No...not really. I think it's more likely that the big threat to us all will be drought and food shortages.

If the UN was trying to kill half the population why would they even allow the TikToks to be seen, which would expose them? And if a doctor tricks me with the vaccine and actually injects me with a microchip so I can be part of a new cashless society, what's the point if I don't know I can pay with my finger? :S

buzz feed again...

 

Edited by iceing Braveheart
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 82 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...