The proposal for $2000 stimulus checks is divisive, and not along simple left-right lines. Lots of disagreement among progressives, with people like Bernie Sanders very pro but many others not on board. Both sides have a point 1/

My take: the economics aren't very good, but the political economy may make such checks necessary 2/ https://t.co/XY7d9E8SDY
The key economic argument, which @crampell picks up on, is that given a slump that has affected people very unevenly, aid should concentrate on those actually suffering 3/ https://t.co/9PVyK4euDd
So if you have a fixed amount to spend, unemployment benefits and maybe small-business aid should be priorities, not checks that will in many cases go to people who are doing OK 4/
But is there a fixed amount to spend? No binding budget constraint for the feds, so this is all about politics. And my sense is that broad issuance of checks is actually kind of a loss leader, helping to sell a package that includes UI 5/
In a way, the very obtuseness of some politicians makes the case here. I keep seeing assertions from progressives that the US Covid response was stingy — completely overlooking the fact that the unemployed got $2400 a month in supplemental aid 6/
On one side, what?? On the other, this shows that UI tends to be invisible in the political sphere, while the $1200 checks, while far less important in human terms, got all the attention. It's frustrating, but also an indication of how the politics works 7/
So while analysts should try to get politicians to understand the economic realities, I don't think we should campaign against checks for (almost) everyone. They're not great policy, but they may be a necessary part of selling the deal 8/
Yglesias on UI 9/ https://t.co/yLXPahyg2T

More from Trading

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.