Economic Stimulus

[Mango]

Huh? Impeach for what?
You get what you vote for and there aint one politician who hasnt made promises they havent kept.
Impeachment is meant for serious serious stuff
Like lying under oath

My post was meant to be tongue and cheek, but if you want to take it seriously, google impeachment and you'll find many organizations who were seeking it at one point or still looking to charge Bushco with high war crimes and lies, which is serious "stuff" and NO, I did NOT vote for Bush. http://www.impeachnow.org/

Hold on Buckos...don't cash those stimulus checks so fast--the Senate hasn't spoken:

Senators Consider Rebates for Retirees
By ANDREW TAYLOR – 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON (AP) —
The Senate is also considering an extension of jobless benefits to the $150 billion package of rebates and business tax cuts in a deal wrapped up Thursday between House leaders and President Bush.
"

Glad the Senate isn't going to be bullied into this plan.

Nancy wanted food stamp increases, which is probably a laudable gesture, but has nothing to do with stimulating the economy or creating jobs.

Goofer, I posted above multiple opinions from reliable sources why it will add a boost to the economy. Also extending unemployment benefits will add stimulus, but not only that, many people do not realize that there are many programs available to the unemployed to help them set up businesses, train for other job skills etc. NY has one the best available, and has great success in helping unemployed individuals collect benefits, train in business principles they were not very strong in, and follow up once the benes ended. Successful recipients also voluntarily aide to newbies.

Bdarg, I agree with you. I want to see these funds go to the truly needy.
As far as those not paying taxes though, having been in the mortgage industry for so long, before liar loans, I had probably just as many tax returns cross my desk than an accountant at tax season. I saw too many people with write offs for investment properties, self employed in cash businesses, the Xmas tree farm people getting huge tax breaks etc., so I have become a bit jaded in that respect as to who is really truly needy.
I was for extending unemployment benefits and increasing food stamps.
I am sure there are those who don't pay taxes that are needy as well, and that there will be no way to sort through which ones are and not so a limit had to be set so as not to create a delay in the stimulus program.

ChrisV, a one week decrease in new unemployment applications means nothing.
January 4, 2008
Unemployment in the U.S. rose sharply last month and government figures released late Friday show the number of new jobs was at its lowest level in four years. American unemployment rose to five percent last month, the highest rate since 2005 and new employment statistics released Friday show the U.S. economy added only 18,000 new jobs in December, far fewer than most economists expected.
Also, in my business I have followed these figures for many years, and they are worthless to me. There have been so many mistakes and retractions depending on what the gov't wants people to hear. It's not just unemployment either. I judge by what I hear in the market as well as what I hear from the headhunting industry.

Also please go back and re-read my post regarding the fact that it still up in the air how Fannie and Freddie will price these higher loan amounts.
Yes, the higher loan amounts were approved.

 

[Teresa]

I have to agree with you SJ. We, the American people, have over spent and over borrowed and that has gotten us to where our economy is now. We have run out of credit, so now we want to borrow on our children's future earnings. The first bush rebate was a rebate for votes, this one is a rebate for legacy. Both are a loan against our children's future income.

Although I, much as the rest of you, do not like to think about it, I think the economy is in need of a correction. The question is do we endure it now, or do we try to push it off in hopes that our kids get it?

I do not agree with those who say that if given a rebate, then it should only go to those who currently pay taxes should not be shared with those who do not currently pay taxes. I have two problems with those type statements. The first is that this rebate comes not from the current tax payers, but rather from the future tax payers. We are not paying our way as it is, we are borrowing from the Chinese and most of the rest of the world to sustain our life styles. These loans are to be paid by some future generation that we try to forget about. The second is that if the rebate truly is meant to stimulate the economy, then the rebate money needs to go to those who will inject it into the economy and who better than those who will need it for mere substance; besides they have children that will be just as likely to be paying those future taxes that are being rebated now. Besides $1200 is more than a month's unemployment benefit, many people need the that help now.

Bdarg - I like your reasoning on all counts.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I like the outside the box thinking, bdarg. I question the part about the people who need money for mere substance being the ones who will best inject it into the economy. I really think that the people who need money for substance, will get it one way or another, otherwise, they would die. If you really want to give it to people who will inject it into the economy, give the money to to all children under the age of 18. They will go to town on spending, pumping up not only US retailers, but also bringing the poor into the middle class in China.

 

[Teresa]

I like the outside the box thinking, bdarg. I question the part about the people who need money for mere substance being the ones who will best inject it into the economy. I really think that the people who need money for substance, will get it one way or another, otherwise, they would die. If you really want to give it to people who will inject it into the economy, give the money to to all children under the age of 18. They will go to town on spending, pumping up not only US retailers, but also bringing the poor into the middle class in China.

no, I go for Bdarg's strategic thinking. this "gift" will do nothing to help the economy in the long run, IMO, so give it to those who really need it most.

if and when we receive a check from the govt, isn't it irresponsible to go out and blow it when we all have financial problems to some extent? something seems wrong with this whole idea. is this what we teach our children?

 

[elgordoboy]

I like the outside the box thinking, bdarg. I question the part about the people who need money for mere substance being the ones who will best inject it into the economy. I really think that the people who need money for substance, will get it one way or another, otherwise, they would die. If you really want to give it to people who will inject it into the economy, give the money to to all children under the age of 18. They will go to town on spending, pumping up not only US retailers, but also bringing the poor into the middle class in China.

I like your idea of bringing the poor into middle class in China. That can be a huge market for us and the whole world. A rising tide lifts all boats. We just need to keep them dollar dependent, we'll see in a few years how it pans out.

 

[Mango]

I like the outside the box thinking, bdarg. I question the part about the people who need money for mere substance being the ones who will best inject it into the economy. I really think that the people who need money for substance, will get it one way or another, otherwise, they would die.

That's one of the problems SJ. On top of the fact that food costs have risen drastically, some people have had to turn to food pantries. The food pantries stocks are very low. Matter of fact, a friend of mine who mans one in the city says there have been times when it is empty. This was never the case before. People getting food stamps go there when their stamps run out since they get so little and regular families not on food stamps go to get food too. Give it to the poor and they will spend the money.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I like your idea of bringing the poor into middle class in China. That can be a huge market for us and the whole world. A rising tide lifts all boats. We just need to keep them dollar dependent, we'll see in a few years how it pans out.

Thanks, but not my idea. We, in the US, have brought more Chinese people out of poverty, than we have our very own Americans. While we are not spending, there are many people in China who are feeling the pinch.

Only one thing sounds uncontested, the checks are a big ef up of a problem, no matter how we slice it. Teaching people to spend more, when overspending got us here in the first place, is like handing out free crack to a crack addict in rehab, in hopes that all will work out in the end.

 

[elgordoboy]

Thanks, but not my idea. We, in the US, have brought more Chinese people out of poverty, than we have our very own Americans. While we are not spending, there are many people in China who are feeling the pinch.

Only one thing sounds uncontested, the checks are a big ef up of a problem, no matter how we slice it. Teaching people to spend more, when overspending got us here in the first place, is like handing out free crack to a crack addict in rehab, in hopes that all will work out in the end.

I knew that wasn't what you meant. I wanted to show you a different way of thinking about it. Our people we need to bring out of poverty- I see no reason to begrudge them $600 maybe they'll spend it on tuition at a community college. And the amount isn't like handing out free crack it's like giving the pipe with just the residue.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I like the pipe analogy, but I use the crack (analogy), because of it's addictive characteristic. The pipe with residue is more like giving out a checks for $1 million each, but having the word, "VOID," stamped all over it.

 

[elgordoboy]

lol...tru' dat