Reply With Quote
the TX DUA seems to be continuing after the Federal $600 has stopped.
BTw, for those that didn't know, state unemployment benefits are funded by a tax on employers.
the TX DUA seems to be continuing after the Federal $600 has stopped.
Right, but that tax doesn’t cover the extra $100 that Trump says the states need to fund. The $100 is in excess of normal unemployment benefits.
Mnuchin threatens to make taxpayers pay back COVID money unless Trump is reelected
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/08/mnu...e+Raw+Story%29
So Trump gets to ignore the cons ution because Congress has been subjectively deemed dysfunctional? The house passed a bill that McConnell said he’d get behind as long as Trump was behind it.
Trump went around Congress because he knows the American people would blame him and not Congress if nothing was done. That’s why Pelosi didn’t budge and McConnell was more agreeable than he normally is, all the political pressure is on Trump. He shouldn’t get to sidestep Democracy with executive orders when he has nowhere else to turn.
Imo most of your posts since 2016 relating to Trump have actually been fair and unbiased, I’m surprised to see you defending this of all things when it’s one of his most egregious oversteps since taking office.
Ahhh...now you are a strict cons utionalist. Ill remind you of that next time we are discussing a Supreme Court case. The unemployed desperately need the money and a partisan and dysfunctional congress didn't give it to them. Any president has been given the power from congress to act in a crisis and this probably qualifies as millions were about to be thrown out on the streets. Hopefully the threat gives congress an incentive to get a compromise solution done
You don’t exactly need to be a strict cons utionalist to recognize basic separation of powers and checks and balances.
I also think him extending the eviction moratorium and deferring student loan interest was within his executive powers during a crisis. Changing unemployment benefits and adding an additional burden at the state level (without any sources of funding) is what needs legislative approval.
If the American people want the HEROES Act that was passed by the house, it shouldn’t have to compromise. The president is supposed to do what American people want him to do. His belief that $600 a week is too much isn’t something voters agree with. Notto mention how offensive it is that a billionaire trust fund baby is telling people they should be able to survive on $400 (really $300 since the states have no money) a week.
The Dems passed a relief bill 85 days ago. Mitch McConnell hid in his bunker and refused to negotiate. All Trump just did, at best, was kick the can a few weeks into the future. The states have to pay 25% and set up the program on top.
Trump's Rube Goldberg EOs won't even protect renters/homeowners from eviction.
Last edited by Winehole23; 08-09-2020 at 10:21 AM.
It also begs the question - if Trump really had the executive power to extend unemmployment benefits, why did he let them lapse in the first place? He could have signed an executive order to keep them going and simultaneously kept negotiating with Congress for a longer term solution. Kinda a move by him to let people lose their benefits when all it ostensibly takes is a stroke of the pen from him to keep $400 of the $600 going.
Personally, as an employer I think the SS/MC deferral is stupid.
In Interview Disaster Trump Trade Adviser Appears To Admit Executive Orders Are Toothless
https://www.politicususa.com/2020/08...iticus+USA+%29
I'm not defending trump but somebody needs to get money and eviction moratorium to the people that need it.
Yep.
Republicans wanted people to lose their UI benefits. They probably feel guilty about passing them in the first place, but that was the price for the mega-bailout of Wall Street.
The only thing that bothers our government about mass unemployment, homelessness and hunger is the political consequences. If they actually gave a about people, they would have prioritized stopping COVID-19 instead of insisting on a hasty (and delusional) return to the social and economic status quo ante.
,
We represent economic fodder and votes to politicians. As people, we're worse than useless. Our needs represent an odious burden in normal times, why should it be any different when our government's incompetence has made the USA the global epicenter of a pandemic that has thrown 10s of millions of people out of work?
Which Trump’s EOs don’t do. They require states that are already broke and running out of money to put up $100 a week in order for the government to contribute $300. For states that don’t have the money to pony up the extra $100 (which at this point is most of them) the expanded unemployment insurance is gone.
Regarding evictions, I don’t think people understand that even if Trump/Pelosi agree on something, a federal moratorium only protects people in federally financed homes and apartments. If you live in an apartment with a private mortgage, you’re at the mercy of state law. Imo we’re going to see an eviction crisis in the coming months regardless of anything Trump and Congress do.
It is going to take states weeks to set up Trump's new UI, if they are even able to contribute; many may not be able to.
A commercial real estate bust could leave a lot of banks insolvent:
I read months ago R-MBS disaster of 2009 being emulating in 2021 by C-MBS, just as the preceding tweet says.
To be fair, the decline in value of office and retail was going to happen anyway and ty retailers like Jos. A. Bank were never going to survive long term, COVID-19 just accelerated the trend. Real Estate investors and banks saw it coming with retail but missed it with office. The industries that have historically needed the most office space were already downsizing for one reason or another. Law firms no longer needed huge libraries or file cabinets, trading floor style with more people in less space is more common than ever in financing services, etc. The banks with too much credit exposure to office buildings shouldn’t have needed the COVID pandemic to see the long term fall in demand.
All true. The concern here with a concomitant pandemic/depression would be bank insolvency. In the 1900s we had an orderly system for receivership and reorganization, but it would seem Obama broke that mold and threw it away.
Hard to see where the incentive is for banks to clean up their act if the USG backstops all their bull .
The tweet isn’t entirely accurate, REITs typically have less leverage and it’s through corporate debt, not mortgage debt. They don’t try to max out leverage on their assets the way equity funds do. There are some mortgage REITs that have too much leverage (see MITT or IVR for example) and their stock prices reflects as much. There are always exceptions, but banks shouldn’t have too much distressed exposure to REITs.
Fortunately banks don’t have as much commercial real estate exposure on their balance sheet as they had in RMBS exposure 15 years ago. There might be some smaller regional banks that have overextended their CRE lending, but I don’t think any of the larger banks have solvency issues driven by commercial real estate exposure.
I don't disbelieve you, but I am curious why you think so.
Banks don't hold CMBS exposure on their balance sheet the way they were holding RMBS exposure in the years leading up to the crisis. Up until the pandemic hit (and since the pandemic hit CMBS lending has basically come to a halt), banks could make a CMBS loan, securitize it and get it off their books in a month or less. CMBS products are just inherently less risky than the extremely complicated RMBS products from 15 years ago that S&P didn't even understand enough to rate.
Don't get me wrong, there's going to be plenty of CMBS defaults once servicers stop giving forbearance (IMO that's going to hit in Q4 of this year), I just don't think the banks have that much exposure on their balance sheet.
i might even feel differently if congress was completely sitting still and not doing , but the house already passed a relief bill and cocaine mitch basically punted and said i'll agree with whatever the dems/trump want. at that point it was all in trump's hands. house passed a bill, mitch said he'd be ready to support it. its trump who decided to skip the negotiation process or do what is popular and instead issue an EO that directly competes with the bill
1.2 million seek jobless aid after $600 federal check ends
Nearly 1.2 million laid-off Americans applied for state unemployment benefits last week,
evidence that
the coronavirus keeps forcing companies to slash jobs
just as a critical $600 weekly federal jobless payment has expired.
It is the 20th straight week that at least 1 million people have sought jobless aid.
Before the pandemic hit hard in March,
the number of Americans seeking unemployment checks had never surpassed 700,000 in a week,
not even during the Great Recession of 2007-2009.
Without effective virus containment,
the recovery remains at risk from ongoing job losses that could further restrain incomes and spending.″
https://apnews.com/f3caeadfc8c7f88900470ac96820a36c?fbclid=IwAR3tcr_6 C0ACRA-3kCTiVXryLm5oPh1CQ3hIahYhRIcXWzKi8qm2JOmjogc
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
