Economic Stimulus

[ScrmnPeeler]

A weaker dollar actually makes me as an american manufacturer more attractive to customers that sell goods internationally. Basically they get more for their Euro when I get to supply their products.

but I'm no economist just an engineer.

I'm also no polititian but a person's rights don't come from the government; they are granted by a higher power. Smaller government actually makes me more powerful to act against an inhuman corporation by protecting my right to work, not work, or "stick it to the man" when that corporation really needs me (or labor) the most.

Did I just blur the line between hippy and conservative? I don't even know what they mean anymore.

[Pru]

Paul, do you understand that the govt doesn't have that money to give "back"? I think you are overlooking the enormous national debt we carry as a result of this administration's insane spending. In the most basic of terms (because I am a simple girl), the money for these rebates will be printed by the Federal Reserve and loaned to the govt at incredibly high interest rates. Interest rates that are ever increasing as more money enters into circulation (and I am not talking about the fed funds rate or the rates banks pay to borrow from the fed). This does not stimulate our economy, what this does is continue to increase our national debt. Pay now or pay later, eh? It's a short sighted political move, pure and simple. WE will pay MORE for these rebates later. If I hired a financial adviser to handle my money and it was done the way the federal govt handles our tax dollars, I would have a solid case to put his or her ass in prison.

I trust paul with this money, but not most Americans. What about the government investing in things that are sustainable. Infrastructure, renewable energy, alternative feuls, education, research, innovation. I just think if the government is going to spend the money, they should think a little bit more into the future.

Andrew is right on. The best way to stimulate the economy would be through investments in the segments of our society that would result in long term productivity growth--the infrastructure for health care, for example. You know, something sustainable, for our future. That doesn't fly in our instant gratification society, but what is happening now IS scary if you look past the surface.

Do I think this rebate is going to be the proverbial straw? No. I just think it's retarded and a ploy to appease the gullible public. It surely will not help our precarious economic situation.

[Paul3eb]

Paul, do you understand that the govt doesn't have that money to give "back"? I think you are overlooking the enormous national debt we carry as a result of this administration's insane spending. In the most basic of terms (because I am a simple girl), the money for these rebates will be printed by the Federal Reserve and loaned to the govt at incredibly high interest rates. Interest rates that are ever increasing as more money enters into circulation (and I am not talking about the fed funds rate or the rates banks pay to borrow from the fed). Guess who profits from that? The privately owned Federal Reserve and the affiliated fat cats.

can't argue against facts.. but

This does not stimulate our economy, what this does is continue to increase our national debt. It's a short sighted political move, pure and simple. WE will pay more for these rebates later.

you still haven't shown me anything that convinces me.. or even sways me to believe that this doesn't stimulate the economy, regardless of its vision because you can't say what the future will hold (which is the reason for this gamble in the first place). some people think the situation will get better and we'll be able to handle any possible repercussions with much issue.. other think things won't change and we'll be in the same hole.. other think hell's about to break loose.

If I hired a financial adviser to handle my money and it was done the way the federal govt handles our tax dollars, I would have a case to put his or her ass in prison.

ha.. i don't know if prison is a humane choice for the mentally challenged.

I trust paul with this money, but not most Americans. What about the government investing in things that are sustainable. Infrastructure, renewable energy, alternative feuls, education, research, innovation. I just think if the government is going to spend the money, they should think a little bit more into the future.

Andrew is right on. The best way to stimulate the economy would be through investments in the segments of our society that would result in long term productivity growth--the infrastructure for health care, for example. You know, something sustainable, for our future. That doesn't fly in our instant gratification society, but what is happening now IS scary if you look past the surface.

and i couldn't agree more, truthfully. all i'm trying to do is suggest there's another side to the argument that holds water. my goals and hopes are more inline with yours.. however, there are other people's goals that aim for a different day.

(if you haven't seen stranger than fiction, see it!

Ana Pascal: Listen, I'm a big supporter of fixing potholes and erecting swing sets and building shelters. I am *more* than happy to pay those taxes. I'm just not such a big fan of the percentage that the government uses for national defense, corporate bailouts, and campaign discretionary funds. So, I didn't pay those taxes. I think I sent a letter to that effect with my return.
Harold Crick: Would it be the letter that begins "Dear Imperialist Swine"?

)

Do I think this rebate is going to be the proverbial straw? No. I just think it's retarded and a ploy to appease the gullible public. It surely will not help our precarious economic situation.

depends on what you consider the "economic situation". if you're talking long-term, you have a point. if you're talking six/twelve months.. you might lose this argument (though not to me).

either way, both sides have valid points, both sides should be heard.

[Pru]

okay, let me break this down to what I see is the fundamental flaws of this plan. The money that you get "back" in rebates today increases our national debt. We (the American people) WILL have to pay it back later. At that later time, it will cost far more for 2 reasons: the increasing interest on what the govt owes, and the lower value of tomorrow's dollars. (IOW it'll take more bucks to cover this bet.)

In addition to the increased cost of this money later, what I see happening is that the fed will happily print more money to throw it at people, and the vast majority of those people will spend it on foreign made goods (we manufacture VERY little in this county anymore, please recall). It is the American way. Exactly how does that help? And those of us who will stick it in the bank are also not helping. What about the people who will use it to pay off their high interest cc debt? Also not helping. I have not heard anything that convinces me that the people who are eligible are going to go out and take that piddling rebate and make any real impact (and it really is small until you add them all together. Then it is HUGE).

So that is about as clear as my little brain can explain my perspective. Many people who are much smarter than me don't believe throwing 150 billion dollars out there is going to help at all, even for the "short" term of 6 to 12 months as that interest compounds while the dollar falls. I agree with them for the reasons above. Again, I see this as nothing but a political ploy. The shrub is worried about his legacy, and his legacy in this case will be to have added even more to our overall national debt.

[Paul3eb]

Many people who are much smarter than me don't believe throwing 150 billion dollars out there is going to help at all, even for the "short" term of 6 to 12 months as that interest compounds while the dollar falls.

..yeah.. but many people who are also much smarter than us believe that it will.

and a good piece on the 2001 rebates:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=18391650

Jason Furman, senior fellow and director of The Hamilton Project at Brookings Institution, talks about the studies done on how consumers used their 2001 tax rebates and how effective they were in stimulating the economy.

He says that even the lowest estimate of how much of the rebate was spent was enough to help the economy, but if checks had been sent to poor people who don't pay taxes, the positive effect on the economy would have even been more significant.

that's all i have to add to this conversation, if i added anything but filler

[pigsteak]

paul, pru is stuck on the fact it is a republican who has offered the checks twice, and she is just chomping at the bit to nail him. her thinly veiled bitterness has made her into an economic advisor.

again, take your check and burn it pru..you don't have to aceept the money. then you can go forward in good conscience. or I will gladly spend it for you.

[Pru]

I make too much money to be eligible for a rebate, chuffer. So suck it. That piddling rebate is chump change. I am only bitter about it because I will have to pay back the interest on YOUR debt after you go out and buy bigger tvs, foreign made tvs, which you will use to gorge your minds on higher definition trash so you can dumb yourself down to even lower levels than previously thought possible.

Bush is not a true republican, by the way. His administration has grown the government to bloated proportions only a democrat could admire. (Remember, I am neither...)

[pigsteak]

double check. I am betting you will be getting a rebate check.

single wage earners making up to $75,000 get the full rebate automatically. in fact, up to $160,000 a family of four will still get a rebate of $1,800.

I agree...Shrub is an embarassment.

If it helps your venom, I haven't bought a new TV since 1990, before Clinton. Maybe I finally deserve one. Then I might even buy cable.

[Alan Evil]

...as the dollar weakens, we'll look to domestic goods more...

Slight problem with this idea: we don't make consumer goods in the US anymore. We've packed up the factories and sent them abroad, there are no people that know how to run the machines anymore even if we still had them, and the ultra-wealthy that run the show get richer no matter what.

I just wish that refund check was coming out of the pockets of the wealthiest 1% as it should be, but it's coming out of you breeders' childrens' pockets.

-

[Crankmas]

Wow Pru, you make me sooo horny with that fancy econ lingo, I just wanna get a feather and go all crazzzy!