Economic Stimulus?

[JimmyPageZoSo56]

the thing I find the funniest is that Bush gave money to bail out banks. when the car companies needed money because the banks screwed them over, Congress ripped them to shreds saying "You flew over on private jet..." blah, blah, blah.

Anyway, the car companies said they would even pay it back and they banks spend tax payer dollars and don't have to pay it back. Generous of the car companies but the banks have screwed the country over. they got money with no strings attached which is worse that the car companies.

[cryingbluerain]

Down and out in Paris..(book by Orwell)

See how well the socialist French are faring these days.

http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMo...=22&sp=true

[wanna be drummer]

Oh and what Bush did wasn't bad? Begging Congress to give him money to bail out the banks that screwed people over? Your hard earned money went to banks not getting back on track but their spa expenses.

Screwed people over? HA

The government screwed the banks over

[Pb Derigable]

Oh and what Bush did wasn't bad? Begging Congress to give him money to bail out the banks that screwed people over? Your hard earned money went to banks not getting back on track but their spa expenses.

Tim Geitner, who is the new treasury secretary, whom also does not pay taxes and claims he uses H&R Block which prompts you many times to fix mistakes, is the one who came up with the whole TARP (a.k.a. Bank Bailout) deal.

P.S. The democrats just had a retreat in Virgina, in which the taxpayers picked up every single dime. Which includes every flight, every Lobster cooked, Steak grilled and every Spa treatment.

I would like to point out the Bank Bailout was a written by democrats and the republicans where lampooned for not supporting it.

[TypeO]

Oh and what Bush did wasn't bad? Begging Congress to give him money to bail out the banks that screwed people over? Your hard earned money went to banks not getting back on track but their spa expenses.

BEGGING Congress???

You CAN'T be serious.

Those motherfuckers are money junkies - they're just LOOKING for a reason to spend money so they can all peel some off as it passes through their hands.

Also, I love the "Bush justification" - well HE did it first!

I thought he was the idiot whose policies and solutions they're trying to change away from.

But for the record, I was against that TARP bullshit as well.

Should have let AIG and the rest of them go.

Our economy is trying to correct itself, but these idiots keep trying to artificially stimulate it to stay at the level it's at. Just delaying the inevitable.

The sooner we just take our lumps, the sooner we'll be out the other side and growing at a natural, sustainable rate.

[mag9990]

I would say put it in a savings account... but I'd probably end up blowing it on shit like food and a new TV.

Still, at least I'd be the one using my own money. Only i can't really bitch, I got a pretty good return this year off my 1040.

[JimmyPageZoSo56]

BEGGING Congress???

You CAN'T be serious.

Those motherfuckers are money junkies - they're just LOOKING for a reason to spend money so they can all peel some off as it passes through their hands.

Also, I love the "Bush justification" - well HE did it first!

I thought he was the idiot whose policies and solutions they're trying to change away from.

But for the record, I was against that TARP bullshit as well.

Should have let AIG and the rest of them go.

Our economy is trying to correct itself, but these idiots keep trying to artificially stimulate it to stay at the level it's at. Just delaying the inevitable.

The sooner we just take our lumps, the sooner we'll be out the other side and growing at a natural, sustainable rate.

I am not trying to defend Bush if that's what you think. I can't stand him. I am just making a point. He did beg Congress and they gave him the money.

[JimmyPageZoSo56]

Screwed people over? HA

The government screwed the banks over

Hahaha. wow do you even do research before you shoot your mouth off? Let's take Bernie Madoff for example. He may have not worked for a bank. But its people like him who put us in this mess. He stole $50 billion dollars from families, actors, V.I.Ps, etc. People went to get their money for something and it was gone! They have no chance of getting it back because its gone. It's been moved around and distributed so many times they can't get it back.

Or Tom Petters, the man from my state. He may not have worked for a bank but he helped bring the economy down by stealing money. He stole $3 billion from people. You know how much it costs to be Tom Petters a day? Lemme give you a rundown. $227,000 a month; $57,000 per week; $7,500 per day; $5.26 per minute. He is one of the reasons why we are in this mess.

But back on track with the banks, how has the government screwed people over? How is it not the banks fault? Please, I must know.

[euro]

Our economy is trying to correct itself, but these idiots keep trying to artificially stimulate it to stay at the level it's at. Just delaying the inevitable.

The sooner we just take our lumps, the sooner we'll be out the other side and growing at a natural, sustainable rate.

I question the effectiveness of these stimulation programs as well;the only thing it stimulates are votes from the lobby gioups and constituents the spending purports to help

[Dzldoc]

Stimulus Payment Info.

"This year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?

A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?

A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?

A. Only a smidgen. Q. What is the purpose of this payment?

A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?

A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely: If you spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.

If you spend it on gasoline it will go to the Arabs.

If you purchase a computer it will go to India.

If you purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala (unless you buy organic).

If you buy a car it will go to Japan.

If you purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan.

And none of it will help the American economy. We need to keep that money here in America. You can keep the money in America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer and wine (domestic ONLY), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses still in the US.

[Mona]

I'm not a taxpayer and I don't have a job, so a part of me thinks that if I got $7000 I would spend it all pretty quickly. I don't think I would. I'd probably spend some of it and then put the rest in the bank. I'd probably use most of it to help pay for college.

[BUCK'EYE' DOC]

Oh and what Bush did wasn't bad? Begging Congress to give him money to bail out the banks that screwed people over? Your hard earned money went to banks not getting back on track but their spa expenses.

Wake Up!

The Bush bashing is over! He's gone!

You can no longer blame everything on him! (Oh, I am sure that people will still try to! )

Any economist knows that if people lose confidence in the banking system, then all commerce will cease and there will be a huge economic depression that will take decades to overcome. There was no option but to support the banking institutions. There should have been more strings tied to them using the money. And this was not Bush's fault. It was the Democrat majority congress pushing for something to be done without any consideration of the consequences.

And AIG, an insurance company, insured the mortgages that were packaged and sold into deriatives and other complicated, poorly understood securities. If this insurance company failed, then the whole banking system would have collapsed with catasrtophic results. The loss of total confidence would have been a disaster. (Remember the Great Depression of the 1930's and the run on the banks? If everyone lost confidence and took their money out of the banks, there would not be enough cash to pay everyone off and the banking system would fail).

[Pip]

We had a bit of economic stimulus last year just before x-mas for low income households - not sure if it worked yet...

The next package coming out here in Australia includes loads of infrastructure stuff and housing and things so that should be good...

They are putting heaps of it into schools - all good things... time will tell though...

[The Rover]

With 7K, I'd hire the services of a financil lawyer, and attmpt to screw the credit card companies, that charge usury fees and exploitative fees.

We're bailing out the "Banks"... but they're the ones giving the public a daily screwing with credit card schemes.... Thank Uncle Sam..... they must pay you and your friends off well !!

But you already know that, didn't you ? ? ?

[JimmyPageZoSo56]

Wake Up!

The Bush bashing is over! He's gone!

You can no longer blame everything on him! (Oh, I am sure that people will still try to! )

Uh...yes I can. But I have not blamed him for everything. People still and will always rip on former presidents.

[The Rover]

U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailout Programs

By Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry

Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The stimulus package the U.S. Congress is completing would raise the government’s commitment to solving the financial crisis to $9.7 trillion, enough to pay off more than 90 percent of the nation’s home mortgages.

The Federal Reserve, Treasury Department and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have lent or spent almost $3 trillion over the past two years and pledged up to $5.7 trillion more. The Senate is to vote this week on an economic-stimulus measure of at least $780 billion. It would need to be reconciled with an $819 billion plan the House approved last month.

Only the stimulus bill to be approved this week, the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program passed four months ago and $168 billion in tax cuts and rebates enacted in 2008 have been voted on by lawmakers. The remaining $8 trillion is in lending programs and guarantees, almost all under the Fed and FDIC. Recipients’ names have not been disclosed.

“We’ve seen money go out the back door of this government unlike any time in the history of our country,” Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, said on the Senate floor Feb. 3. “Nobody knows what went out of the Federal Reserve Board, to whom and for what purpose. How much from the FDIC? How much from TARP? When? Why?”

The Federal Reserve so far is refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return. Collateral is an asset pledged by a borrower in the event a loan payment isn’t made.

Fed Sued

Bloomberg requested details of Fed lending under the Freedom of Information Act and filed a federal lawsuit against the central bank Nov. 7 seeking to force disclosure of borrower banks and their collateral. Arguments in the suit may be heard as soon as this month, according to the court docket. Bloomberg asked the Treasury in an FOIA request Jan. 28 for a detailed list of the securities it planned to guarantee for Citigroup and Bank of America. Bloomberg hasn’t received a response to the request.

[manderlyh]

I'm sure that if every taxpaying citizen in the US got $7K, the majority of it would be to uphold their lifestyle while unemployed.

Many of you know that I just graduated college in December. I have a degree in teaching, which is supposed to be a recession-proof profession. I am a substitute right now because there were no job openings when I graduated--K-12 rarely has job openings in the middle of the school year. Not only are there zero to no openings for a 6-12 English teacher in Idaho, there won't be any new openings in Idaho for teachers next year--period. Forget that our classrooms have more than 30 kids per class--even in the lower grades, the economy's condition is forcing the school districts to cut jobs. This brings me to a new point--how am I, a no-experience, newly minted teacher going to get a job? I'm honestly thinking about going back to grad school in August--the university will let me teach an adjunct job while going to school--especially since I'm already a certified teacher--but it's at the whopping salary of $10K.

Here I am, substituting, and I'm totally, ridiculously flat broke. My first paycheck doesn't come until the 15th of the month, my car insurance would have been canceled had my boyfriend not paid it with his credit card, and there are NO jobs out there for me--at all. I'm not talking just teaching jobs, I'm talking ANY jobs. I go to read the classifieds, and it seems that all the jobs out there are ones that are those "work at home" shifty-types.

In order to live while student teaching (an unpaid-full time internship), I used all of my savings. Though I do get paid in about 6 days, I can't imagine trying to keep afloat in this economy if one doesn't have a job. Because I quit my job in August willingly--I had to for my internship, I don't qualify for unemployment--which sucks because in order to finish my degree, I had no choice.

Because I am underemployed, I am without health care, which is huge because I have several RXs that I need to take daily, and I can't even afford my $9 a month birth control pills.

The economic stimulus will most likely go to paying electric bills, rent or mortgages, car insurance, medical needs, etc. for the unemployed or underemployed. I think the majority of these people aren't going to buy a TV or a computer. (a new computer was my tax-return plan this year, but it's not happening...I'm too scared to spend because I'm so grossly underemployed)

[I have got a horsey]

It's quite a different attitude here in Australia where the Government has decided to give money to people. If you earn up to $80,000 a year, then this year the Government will give you $950 cash, basically. But the argument here is opposite to the one in the USA. The Australian Govt wants people to go out and spend to keep the economy moving whereas the opposition party says people won't spend it, they'll save it.

I mean I'm sure everyone's gonna love getting a cheque for $950 to spend on whatever, but I'm not really sure just handing out $12billion is such a good idea. Okay, I don't have a struggling family to support and maybe that money would be great if you are in that situation. But I think, probably as some detractors in the US are thinking, that that money will just be spent on bills and not stimulating the economy. I'm no genius at economics, but I would've thought the money would need to be spent in a consumerist way, instead of paying the gas bill. I also think $950 is a difficult amount of money. I mean if you gave every worker in the country $9,500 well that would make a much bigger difference because people would be able to pay bills and splash out on the economy. But then that would require the Aust Govt spending $120 billion, and there's no way it could afford to do that.

So if the stimulus package in the US is going to cost each American taxpayer $7,000, then frankly, yeah maybe congress should just give everybody 7 grand, that would really give the US economy a right kick up the arse. But then who knows? Maybe that would only be a cosmetic remedy to the economic problem, and also I don't know if that would affect inflation.

[wanna be drummer]

Hahaha. wow do you even do research before you shoot your mouth off? Let's take Bernie Madoff for example. He may have not worked for a bank. But its people like him who put us in this mess. He stole $50 billion dollars from families, actors, V.I.Ps, etc. People went to get their money for something and it was gone! They have no chance of getting it back because its gone. It's been moved around and distributed so many times they can't get it back.

So your argument for "The banks screwed us over and tanked the economy" is that Bernie Madoff stole money...yes $50 billion stolen by a 70 year old ruined the economy...

Or Tom Petters, the man from my state. He may not have worked for a bank but he helped bring the economy down by stealing money. He stole $3 billion from people. You know how much it costs to be Tom Petters a day? Lemme give you a rundown. $227,000 a month; $57,000 per week; $7,500 per day; $5.26 per minute. He is one of the reasons why we are in this mess.

Entirely irrelevant to the conversation.

But back on track with the banks, how has the government screwed people over? How is it not the banks fault? Please, I must know.

How has the government screwed people over? Where have you been the last 110 years?

Well if you want to talk jsut recently then I'll say that forced sub-prime lending screwed the banks over...which is what I said in the first place, not "government screwed people over." I said banks.

[manderlyh]

^we got cash last year. I used it to pay bills--literally, that $300 I got saved my butt financially that month.

I got $300 because I am single, no kids and I got a full refund on my taxes last year.

If you paid taxes, each single person got $600; married couples got $1200, and then they got $600 for each child.

I think the government flubbed on this one because they didn't inform the citizens well enough about it. If you had earned income credit or otherwise didn't pay taxes (like me--I got a full refund because I was a student in 2007), you only got $300 for yourself or $600 per married couple, and $300 per child. Though I knew I was only getting $300, many people were disappointing because they didn't get the $600 per person they thought they would get.

[I have got a horsey]

^we got cash last year. I used it to pay bills--literally, that $300 I got saved my butt financially that month.

I got $300 because I am single, no kids and I got a full refund on my taxes last year.

If you paid taxes, each single person got $600; married couples got $1200, and then they got $600 for each child.

So you got that cash supplement on top of your tax refund?

[wanna be drummer]

So if the stimulus package in the US is going to cost each American taxpayer $7,000, then frankly, yeah maybe congress should just give everybody 7 grand, that would really give the US economy a right kick up the arse. But then who knows? Maybe that would only be a cosmetic remedy to the economic problem, and also I don't know if that would affect inflation.

Economically speaking, giving out $7,000 to the people, for doing nothing, makes no sense. Short-term, it may create a boost, then inflation would kick in. That's how capitalism (or at least what we pretend is capitalism) works in America

[wanna be drummer]

[manderlyh]

So you got that cash supplement on top of your tax refund?

Yes. I think I got mine in May(?) last year? It was supposed to be from 2007's taxes.

I really don't think it helped our economy. It helped me short-term, but I don't think it helped our economy.

I worked at a grocery store as a manager for 5 years while I was in college. Our stores offered an extra bonus if you cashed your stimulus check and put it on a store gift card--they gave you $700 for a $600 check--but you had to put it on a gift card. I don't think too many people took us up on the offer because 1. the store is an upper-end store in terms of quality and cost (meaning not too many people can afford to shop there--especially now) and 2. many people really needed the money for bills--not groceries.

As much as I'd totally LOVE to have more "stimulus" money handed to me--I think it's a mistake to keep doling out extra money--it will just cause inflation in our economy if we're not careful.

[JimmyPageZoSo56]

Well if you want to talk jsut recently then I'll say that forced sub-prime lending screwed the banks over...which is what I said in the first place, not "government screwed people over." I said banks.

Yes, and I asked you how they did and you never gave an answer. you made a point without valid information or any information at all which made you look like a blowhard. But again, how did the government screw over the banks? They tried to save the banks by giving them money. They didn't screw them over. You clearly do not know what you are talking about. Now are you going to give me a valid answer on why you think the government screwed over the banks or no?