If ever I read any part of Richard's posts it's the first sentence. On rare occasion I make the additional mistake of also reading the last.
Last time I compounded those mistakes by responding.
Funny how since responding to what was then his last sentence his post has grown twice as long.
Not going to make those mistakes again.
Crain's is reporting, I think, that the new Detroit Community School district will obtain $980 million from the American Recovery Act. Can anyone confirm that? According to the NCES Common Core of school data, the district enrolled 49,931 students in the 2019-2020 year. That works out to
be $19,627 per student. That is a substantial fund.
Is that amount in addition to the $15k per student already being spent or is it bringing the total up to $19k?Quote:
Originally Posted by renf
The Senate COVID-19 bill provides approximately $123 billion in a general stabilization fund for public K-12 schoolsfor states and school districts.https://www.edweek.org/policy-politi...9-bill/2021/03Its
over and above what is already being spent,the question is if they can use it in a way that does not incur future obligations.
The package actually had little to do with virus stimulus,it was based on cities that had the highest unemployment rate,and mostly cities that have had years of mismanagement leading up to.
Basically a bailout,Detroit has pretty much proven that to they were doing what it took and could use the shot in the arm,so to speak,but a majority of the other cities are being rewarded for their mismanagement.
Cities like Minneapolis that allowed it to burn to the ground are being reimbursed for those actions,where as other cities that were proactive and protective have to pick up that tab for the others.If one was going to be fair about it,it should have been a set figure across the board.
It answers the question of if there are restrictions on the money,most of it is already targeted.
...because of Covid...Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
That would make no sense at all, because cities aren't equal in their need. Just like how the stimulus is targeted to people who make less, city stimulus is targeted to cities that need it given the circumstances.Quote:
If one was going to be fair about it,it should have been a set figure across the board.
Detroit is going to have a much higher need for federal aid given their citizens are the most likely to lose their job due to Covid, fall behind on rent and mortgages, and lessen their tax obligation to the city, therefore creating huge budget constraints.
Whats not to get?
Attachment 41398 Crank it out. What's to lose?
Some people just think tax dollars should be steered towards the well to do. The concept of the velocity of money and how it grows the economy is lost on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonWylie
There’s always $$$ for war; always $$$ for a tax break for Walmart and Betsy Devos though.
^ Sadly the war mongering and tax breaks for the new anointed and appointed will continue. Good times, big money to the new power elite and their friends.
Meet the new big spenders, the new bosses, the new elite.
Right. Just the very buy power of each dollar leading to hyper-inflation. Which of course impacts/ hurts those on a fixed income, and the poor first!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray1936
Well let me put it this way,as an example,during the riots of the summer,the city of Detroit acted proactively,therefore receiving no damage or little damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonWylie
But that also came at a cost to the local taxpayers,resources for overtime,extra police and security etc. granted only proably a few million at the least.
The residents spent that money out of their general fund.
Now the flip side,for example,Minneapolis suffered 55 million in damages,which is being reimbursed by the federal government,in the stimulus.
Where does the federal government get their money? From you.
So now you not only get to pay the bill for what happened in Detroit,you also have to pay everybody else’s bills that allowed the damage to occur.
So Detroit as a city is being punished for being proactive while having to foot the bill for the cities that were not.
Next time try and direct riots to the worst neighborhood that needs rebuilding,let it burn to the ground and collect a check.
But that had zero to do with the stimulus.
No need to be defensive,not for nothing but the same cities that have historically had a high unemployment rate before Covid,will still have the exact same situation after Covid,unless changes are made.
This money is chump change in the bigger picture,it does not represent 1 year of city revenue lost due to the lockdowns,it is not really a game changer,outside of the sense that it will stop the city from getting kicked back a year,it is already spent or allocated,so when it is dispersed you will be right back to where you were December in 2019.
The targeted cities or the formula used was based on the unemployment rate or job loss directly related to the virus,that is why cities that did not lock down or had little job losses received little funds.
The money will drive the economy for a few months like the last stimulus did,unless they print more money or your economy opens back up increasing the demand for jobs,3 months from now you will be right back to where you are today.
The city of Detroit projects a $348 million revenue loss impacting the general fund for the duration of 2020, through June 30, 2021.
https://www.mlive.com/coronavirus/20...ronavirus.html
So that would be the reporting period from June of last year until June of 2020.
Plus add the 3 prior months losses from when the virus started.
The state as a whole was at a 6 billion budget deficit.
Not for nothing but the stimulus was not targeted to the lower income levels because they needed the help,it was targeted to the lower percentage because they know the recipients will spend every dime back into the economy and not save any or pay down debt.
It is called a stimulus for a reason,it’s to get money flowing directly back into the economy,any help that it provides is temporarily.
Despite the claims that only the rich benefited from the last stimulus and this one is for the poor,the last stimulus was to keep the country and states afloat otherwise everything would have been bankrupt.
How come the income levels above $75,000 a year did not get their cheese on this one? They do not deserve it because they have been prudent?
Here is the list from the last one
.https://hannity.com/wp-content/uploa...mary_FINAL.pdf
Read it and tell me that it is true that the lower income was not targeted with,medical,daycare,housing,food,eviction relief,weekly unemployment checks past the limit,etc. because they were.
I agree, it’s unbelievable. If the day of having to pay the piper for running the printing presses like this ever happens, it’s not going to be pretty.Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
I honestly have no idea what your point is, maybe you can clear it up? It seems like we're both in agreement that the stimulus money was targeted to low-income, hard hit areas that will utilize it to recoup losses from the pandemic and utilize it to benefit their citizens going forward. As for Minneapolis, you can't really be proactive when there are protests and riots hours after a citizen was killed in the streets, so comparing that to Detroit doesn't really make any sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Back to the topic on hand, I expect Detroit will utilize this money to fill the hole they had in the budget, and they will likely have some holes going into next fiscal year as well, so they will save some for that. Then maybe they will utilize it to help those who lost their jobs with rent/mortgage assistance or expand the city jobs program.
This is exactly what everyone wanted in a stimulus package, hence the large approval rating. We needed to reimburse cities for following the guidelines and limiting business activity. The argument was always that we were destroying the economy with a lock down, so the government had to step up and help cities that attempted to stop the spread of the virus.
I just had a thought. Can you imagine if Kwame was still mayor and the city recieved this kind of cash unallocated? The unmitigated graft I'm sure would be the envy of every political criminal in history.
I'll say it again, Detroit needs to make sure it gets ROI on these dollars. Kickstarting some transformational, headline worthy project a-la Riverwalk, Q Line, Goldie Howe Bridge, etc is what the situation requires.
I have to respectfully disagree... the bridge is being funded by the Canadian government, with tolls repaying the debt. No Covid money should go to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by K-slice
The Riverfront has the Conservancy that [[along with private foundations) is doing a good job of upgrading the River Walk.
The Q-Line probably can get federal transportation money.
These funds are supposed to help the suffering people of Detroit, and should be earmarked in such a way.
Please read carefully: https://usdebtclock.org/Quote:
Originally Posted by softailrider
In a seasonally-relevant comment, a famous man purportedly said, "... weep not for me, but for yourselves and for your children."
That debt clock exploded from 2016 through 2020 with nothing positive to show for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by beachboy
I don't get it either. It goes against everything I thought I understood about economics but I've listened to economists on tv, read some articles, etc. and almost all say as long as the gov't can service the debt it doesn't matter how high it is. Doesn't inflation and rising interest rates down the line matter? Don't the interest payments continue to eat up a greater portion of expenditures? The theory goes the gov't can always print more money and roll the debt over so indeed it doesn't matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by beachboy
High levels of deficit and consequent debt will indeed force us to have near-zero interest rates for the foreseeable future, with all the possible depressing consequences that come with it: asset inflation, economic stagnation, nowhere safe to park your savings, market volatility, no social mobility, etc. Cases in point: Japan 1990-present and Europe 2011-present. We risk being stuck forever in that black hole of stagnation. I am sure, as you point out, that all the Paul Krugmans on cnn/nyt will disagree and that they will keep cheerleading these disastrous policies with their wishful thinking economics, just like they cried foul on the debt in 2017 when Congress passed the tax cut.Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
At first I thought that was a typo but then ... John Oliver.Quote:
The national debt has long been portrayed as a burden we’re placing on future generations. John Oliver discusses how national debt works, why people are so concerned about it, and why it might be more helpful that you think.