Muh Muh Muh My Corona (virus)

This is insane!

 

Driftwood was talking about taking savings from the operating funds this year to begin a capital project. I assumed that meant it works differently in that state. I know New York has the legal restriction you mentioned.

I wouldn't dismiss optics right now, especially in districts where the budget hasn't passed yet for this year and will still have to pass again next year.

 

Yeah ... this is stunning.

... but not really, from the party of “Donald Trump is an acceptable choice to be President.”

 

I feel comfortable with submitting that a President Hillary would have actually read and paid attention to the President's Daily Briefs, which started to talk about CV in December and were very much interested by Jan/Feb.

 

Agreed. Honestly, there is no question that we would have been better off with any competent politician in the job. Look past the vile comments and behavior, the lies and the corruption and we still have the least competent president of our lifetimes and probably a lot further back than that.

 

I have no idea what's allowed or not in this situation. My comment this morning is probably more scuttlebutt and chatter than actually going to happen. If it does, it's not going to be immediately.

 

From the Covid backwater .... Thought this was a little entertaining.

VIDEO: Arkansas musicians sing ‘We Don’t Want the Covid’

 

I guess this belongs on this thread and not the Adapting or Economy ones, but anyway...when my dad died, I inherited part of his IRA. I have to take a Required Minimum Distribution from it each year like the ones that those aged 70+ have to take from regular IRAs, with the amount calculated according to my age and the account's value at the end of the previous year. My most recent brokerage statement says that as a result of the CARES Act bailout bill, I don't have to take a RMD this year, which means I don't have to pay tax on it at the ordinary income rate. Has this been written up before and I just missed it?

I'm perfectly happy not to take that distribution and (presumably) earn income on the 35-40% of it that I would've paid in federal & state taxes, but this seems like really strange public policy. The people who benefit from this are the ones who don't need the money for spending purposes right away and can afford to not take the RMD - not the ones legislators were saying that the bailout bill was intended to help. If anything, it reduces the amount of consumer spending this year, along with hurting federal and state tax receipts. I don't even see how it particularly helps the financial services industry, except for firms that charge commissions based on the size of the (now slightly larger than they would've been) IRAs they manage. As a one-time break, it's not going to make people more likely to invest in IRAs. So who would have been pushing for this, and why? Seems like reducing tax rates on RMDs for this year only could've had the same cost to the Treasury while increasing consumer spending rather than decreasing it, and helping those who need/want the money more urgently as well as those who don't need it right away.

 

Wisconsin reports record number of new coronavirus cases, deaths

 

The problem with your idea is the thought behind it. You were focused on doing the most good for the people who need it the most. Far too many of the people putting that package together don't care about such things.

 

The full 12 minute video is even more impressive.

 

The story says 12 jurisdictions have had issues, but it only names seven. Why not name them all?