How are you going to use your tax cut to stimulate the economy?

Did I mention the mansion was made of cardboard and I only bought a picture... :laugh:

Seriously, look at it this way, according to the tax center 131,113,969 people filed a tax return in 2004. If each one of these people get an extra $20 per check that would be $2,622,279,380 more dollars hitting the economy every two weeks. Unless my math is wrong, $2 Billion more dollars hitting the economy every two weeks is stimulus... :thumbsup:

All we need is for you to spend your $20 and not try and save it.

 

It is estimated that half of all Americans carry credit card debt.

For those that do, the average: $8,940.

No one is insinuating that everyone experiencing money trouble is completely irresponsible and to blame. But you take it to the other extreme...

And you're wrong. One of the root causes is spending what you don't have...or "do have," but shouldn't spend.

Do you seriously think that everyone who has been foreclosed upon did so because they lost their jobs?

You need a reality check. You aren't looking at this realistically.

 

Who is this We? The Borg Collective? The People's Party? The Bourgeoise?

Oh...so I should do what is better for LeBuick rather than what is better for my family. Riiiiight.


OK, since you're the economist (with protected first amendment rights), tell me this:

I take the $20...and don't spend it, but instead put it in the bank.

You do realize, don't you, that the money doesn't sit in a vault? It is put to work. That's what banks do with money. They don't heat their buildings with bundles of it.

I'm not going to answer this one for you...find it yourself: Do you know how much the annual American family saves?

Oh...I forgot. Ya'll spend money...whether you should or not.

You wouldn't have lasted a month in the Great Depression.

 

Looks like you are proving the Republicans point. If we gave everyone a greater tax cut, all that money would be hitting the economy every two weeks. If we gave everyone $100 a check, that would mean $10 billion more dollars. That would be far better than this government spending.

But it isn't $20 a week. It is $13, and it won't start till summer, and by January it apparently will be $8. Most people won't notice $13/week in their paycheck, particularly if inflation takes off the way some say it will.

That's how we got here. Most people have no rainy day fund. They spend everything they have, and then some. Besides saving money puts the money to work where it does the most good, and does good for you to.

"Spend not save" is horrible financial advice. Save first, and then if you have any left, spend.

 

The very people who say "spend, spend, spend," are the same folks who will howl when they reach retirement age and there is no Social Security.

PL, good luck trying to reason with some of these folk. They simply don't understand the concept of financial responsibility. They think it's OK to operate from a deficit...and even if bad times hit when you're in a hole...hey, it's not my fault.

 

Why did I see very little posted by conservatives about deficit spending during the Bush administration when economic conditions were doing a whole lot better than they are now? Governments should be running surpluses during the good times and deficits during the bad times.

That's how we do it in Arkansas. We built up a surplus when the economy was doing well and now we can use the surplus to tide us over during this economic downturn.

 

There were several of us that did complain about Bush's drunken sailor spending habits. I was one.

And I have no problem whatsoever with a rainy day fund...in a reasonable context. (in other words, it isn't government's job to hoard money). I certainly prefer that to deficit spending.

But there are some here who don't think it's all that important to save. "Spend, spend, spend, so our economy will get better" is their (misguided) mantra.

 

Yes, but it was very little compared to what it is now that George W. Bush is no longer president and Barack Obama is president, even though the national debt was going up at a $500-600 billion yearly rate during much of the Bush administration.

 

So...since others didn't complain enough in 2002, that somehow invalidates my concerns now?

The reasoning seems to be, "Since ya'll didn't fuss enough when Bush was president, Obama gets a free pass."

Not sure I get that logic...

 

Probably because you didn't look.

But Obama is not doing that. He is running up a deficit in bad times.

I am all for this. Tell Obama. He is the running increasing the deficit here.

 

Didn't say all, however, 3.5 Million is a lot of foreclosures. Remember, 93% of the mortgages are being paid on time... It is only 7% causing this crises. Now 3.5 million must significantly contribute to 7% of the bad mortgages.

Ad to that the balloon ARMS and Stated Income loans, those I blame on the bankers since that was never part of Clinton's legislation. Clinton passed FHA which backed 80% of loans. At the end, I saw loans as much as 115% to the value of the property. Now whose fault is that when that loan goes bad? BANKERS!!!

 

Oh ye of little faith.... Why won't you listen to Chuck?


We gave the bankers billions and they didn't put one dime of it to work. No loans, no investments etc... Instead, they redecorated their offices, ordered more corporate jets and paid out big bonuses. Now if they did that with billions of tax payers dollars, what makes you think they will do right with your $20?

 

I don't remember you complaining much, either.

 

I am all for tax cuts and tax cuts are in this bill. However, I disagree with cutting taxes for the rich since they won't spend or invest one dime more or less because of a tax cut. Now we will spend or invest our $20.

In addition to tax cuts we also need to get the eagle shifting. We tried this by giving the banks money but they bought jets from foreign companies and won't lend a nickel. So the second part to the stimulus is government spending which will get the eagle shifting again and put American's back to work "doing the work America needs done".

This package will also take care of the American's most impacted by this situation. The unemployed and displaced workers. They are our kindred and I have no problem lending them a hand. I might be my or your turn next time.

 

Did you bother to watch the video?

 

Good grief, what craziness.

So...rich people don't spend money (and thus don't deserve it), but poor people do?? That's ridiculous.

• What do you think rich people do with their money? Eat it? Of course they spend and invest it.
• Why do you completely ignore the fact that if I put my money in a bank, that IS economic activity??? Good gracious, how simple must I make it for you?
• What's with the resentment of rich folks? You have read that #10 commandment, haven't you?
• How many poor people have ever given you a job?
• What's this "we" business on the poor stuff? Very few of us are poor. We're posting on the Internet, for crying out loud. We have computers, utilities, food, shelter. Most of us wouldn't have lasted a month in the Great Depression, when real poor people abounded.

Look...I'm not wealthy...but I take seriously that we ought not to be engaged in "wealth envy." It's not right, and it's not healthy.


...And if that wasn't enough...

You heard it here first, folks. If you go into a bank, buy twice the house you can afford, get it with an ARM and balloon payment...it's the Bank's fault. Heck...they ought to give you the house to reward you for their stupidity...

Take your $20 you'll get from Obama and go to Sams. They have cases of "personal responsibility" on sale. Buy a couple.

 

It is simple.. what has gotten us in this mess is Greed

Greedy poor people wanting more than they can afford.. now they don't want to take responsibility on their failures....

AND

Greedy rich people taking advantage of greedy poor people...

Greed is not determined by how much money is in your bank account.

Greed is breaking Commandment #10.

BTW, as a pastor.. I am not going to benefit one penny from this stimulus package.

 

What do you think the "rich" do with their money? They spend a lot more than you and I do, and they invest it. Where do you think they get the money to pay taxes? By selling investments that were at work in the economy hiring people and doing R&D and the like. Rich people don't sit on their money in the back yard.

I am not even rich, and when I have to pay taxes like SS and state taxes, I have to sell investments to do it.

But if you tax cut was $100 then you could spend that much.

That's untrue and you know it. They canceled that order (and lost money doing so that they might not get back ... so now they don't only not have the jet, they don't have the money they put down on it either.

Again, simply uninformed. The vast majority of this money will not be spent for two or three years, long after it is needed. And even then, it won't produce income producing jobs. It will pay people to do busy work that won't produce income. It will pay them with printed money that devalues the money already out there.

Then lend them a hand. But why put the country into even deeper debt for it? If you want to help them, then help them.

 

The real test of the intent of libbies is this, will they be willing to repeal the balance of this spending bill when the economy rebounds and it can no longer be claimed it is needed. Most likely they will not which will show that they simply wanted to expand government control over peoples lives.

 

And likewise, will the GOP call for the tax cuts to be removed when, as you put it ... when the economy rebounds.....? I doubt that.

Why do you see the need to always side with the Right when they are just as much to blame as the Left? Did the GOP and their leadership have ANYTHING to do with this mess we are in? Do they owe us anything?