Stimulus Package

So the news is floating the idea of a second stimulus package, no details, but the libs seem to be all for it.. because "the economy is slowing and people are losing jobs". Now.. far be it from me to suggest that handing out cash won't create any new jobs, but do you guys think we NEED one?

Personally, I don't. The last one didn't create any jobs, which was the goal. It was a temporary bump, which is all this one would be. My guess is it's wanted for the upcoming christmas season more than anything, but when asked how they'll pay for the second round everyone goes mum. My favorite answer so far as the guy who said the stimulus would pay for itself by generating revenue from sales... really? Times are tough, so people will spend the money they get rather than horde it like many did last time?

I don't think handing out money is going to do a damn bit of good.

Yeah, I could use it. It would help me pay off the new Central Air Conditioning we had installed this year.

I'll tell you what, no one could ever accuse me of NOT stimulating the economy this year...Rotorooter had to dig in our yard b/c a tree root got in the pipe (no, Meta, my sh*t wasn't too strong then either LOL)...new dryer...eartubes for all 3 kids...vacation to Florida...new computer to replace the one that died...new windows...new Family Room floor. And oh yeah, a baby coming around Christmas time!

So yeah, bring on another stimulus!

Jugomugo wrote:I don't think handing out money is going to do a damn bit of good.

Give me yours then...

cardinal5150 wrote:... no details, but the libs seem to be all for it...

Fascinating, now how could you come to that conclusion so quickly?

cardinal5150 wrote:So the news is floating the idea of a second stimulus package, no details, but the libs seem to be all for it.. because "the economy is slowing and people are losing jobs". Now.. far be it from me to suggest that handing out cash won't create any new jobs, but do you guys think we NEED one?

Personally, I don't. The last one didn't create any jobs, which was the goal. It was a temporary bump, which is all this one would be. My guess is it's wanted for the upcoming christmas season more than anything, but when asked how they'll pay for the second round everyone goes mum. My favorite answer so far as the guy who said the stimulus would pay for itself by generating revenue from sales... really? Times are tough, so people will spend the money they get rather than horde it like many did last time?

You so contridict yourself ...

How is a stimulus plan different from your tax cuts that you believe this economy needs right now? I believe the democratic stimilus is also targeted toward working people too, and lengthens the time period to draw unemployment (something the republicans oppose, not sure why?)

I think they could get a lot farther with gas prices falling to $3.25/gal. a month before the election.

How about using the the stimulus money to reduce fuel taxes?

Jugomugo wrote:How about using the the stimulus money to reduce fuel taxes?

screw the taxes... just give a gasoline rebate to all retailers of $0.33 per gallon. Will it'll create incentive and promote competition between retailers to lower prices even more to get people to stop there?

meta4 wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:... no details, but the libs seem to be all for it...

Fascinating, now how could you come to that conclusion so quickly?

Because every democrat they've had on CNBC today (3 and counting from the BO campaign, including his chief financial advisor) have said they believe we need a second round... and they've had 3-4 others on this week discussing it and they were also all for it.. so far that's about 7 out of 7... maybe they are the only 7 in the party, but I haven't seen anyone against it from the left yet.

Gee another hand out. Deficit is too big, national debt too high so let's increase it more.

Bman wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:So the news is floating the idea of a second stimulus package, no details, but the libs seem to be all for it.. because "the economy is slowing and people are losing jobs". Now.. far be it from me to suggest that handing out cash won't create any new jobs, but do you guys think we NEED one?

Personally, I don't. The last one didn't create any jobs, which was the goal. It was a temporary bump, which is all this one would be. My guess is it's wanted for the upcoming christmas season more than anything, but when asked how they'll pay for the second round everyone goes mum. My favorite answer so far as the guy who said the stimulus would pay for itself by generating revenue from sales... really? Times are tough, so people will spend the money they get rather than horde it like many did last time?

You so contridict yourself ...

How is a stimulus plan different from your tax cuts that you believe this economy needs right now? I believe the democratic stimilus is also targeted toward working people too, and lengthens the time period to draw unemployment (something the republicans oppose, not sure why?)

Handing people cash is buying votes.. lowering taxes is helping out people who ACTUALLY pay taxes... huge difference... it's accounting 101

Scooby01_98 wrote:Gee another hand out. Deficit is too big, national debt too high so let's increase it more.

I actually agree Scooby ... Like Florida said, I don't agree with everything the party subscribes to, and this happens to be one of them.

cardinal5150 wrote:

Bman wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:So the news is floating the idea of a second stimulus package, no details, but the libs seem to be all for it.. because "the economy is slowing and people are losing jobs". Now.. far be it from me to suggest that handing out cash won't create any new jobs, but do you guys think we NEED one?

Personally, I don't. The last one didn't create any jobs, which was the goal. It was a temporary bump, which is all this one would be. My guess is it's wanted for the upcoming christmas season more than anything, but when asked how they'll pay for the second round everyone goes mum. My favorite answer so far as the guy who said the stimulus would pay for itself by generating revenue from sales... really? Times are tough, so people will spend the money they get rather than horde it like many did last time?

You so contridict yourself ...

How is a stimulus plan different from your tax cuts that you believe this economy needs right now? I believe the democratic stimilus is also targeted toward working people too, and lengthens the time period to draw unemployment (something the republicans oppose, not sure why?)

Handing people cash is buying votes.. lowering taxes is helping out people who ACTUALLY pay taxes... huge difference... it's accounting 101

Oh ... ok. Cutting taxes on the rich and having them sock it away in some offshore account or an investment account really helps revive the economy, which is exactly what you have said a tax cut does. I disgree 100% with you on this one ... giving money back to anyone who needs money to buy groceries, or a new washer or dryer etc stimulates the economy ... giving Warren Buffet, Tom Kelly, Dick Freeland a tax cut does NOTHING for this ecomomy.

I took Accounting 101 ... I also took Economics, something you need a refresher on.

Hey, I DO NOT think the gov should disburse another stimulus. I think it's less about buying votes. I think it's more about saving the economy from sliding even further down the slope of recession. Think about it this way, if we drop $600 on 100% of the households and only 50% are really in "need" of a stimulus to survive, and the other 50% have already adopted the behavior of change towards conservation, half of it's wasted.

But then again, maybe I'm just saying that because I have a job now... The family guy/gal who's unemployed and in serious need of some relief would probably be pro-stimulus.

What's better for the economy, short term one-time gift or long term relief by reducing taxes?

Looks like Acct 101 to me along with buying votes, but who am I to question it, I not an accountant.

LTRT wrote:What's better for the economy, short term one-time gift or long term relief by reducing taxes?

Looks like Acct 101 to me along with buying votes, but who am I to question it, I not an accountant.

If the economy is in the doldrums how does a tax cut help out immediately? It does not ...

Economic stimulae of this variety is exceedingly dumb... Take that money and start a new civilian conservation corps... of look long term and invest it in our schools instead.... Id rather have the 3rd best military in the world at the expense of having the best schools.

with unemployment at 6.1%, lets put some f'ing people to work.

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:What's better for the economy, short term one-time gift or long term relief by reducing taxes?

Looks like Acct 101 to me along with buying votes, but who am I to question it, I not an accountant.

If the economy is in the doldrums how does a tax cut help out immediately? It does not ...

Ever heard of a payroll check?

LTRT wrote:

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:What's better for the economy, short term one-time gift or long term relief by reducing taxes?

Looks like Acct 101 to me along with buying votes, but who am I to question it, I not an accountant.

If the economy is in the doldrums how does a tax cut help out immediately? It does not ...

Ever heard of a payroll check?

For that working poor person an extra $5 a weeks help ... why not just give them a cake and tell them to eat it.

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:What's better for the economy, short term one-time gift or long term relief by reducing taxes?

Looks like Acct 101 to me along with buying votes, but who am I to question it, I not an accountant.

If the economy is in the doldrums how does a tax cut help out immediately? It does not ...

Ever heard of a payroll check?

For that working poor person an extra $5 a weeks help ... why not just give them a cake and tell them to eat it.

YSIW, so they don't want an extra $260 a year? I betcha you'll take it, could buy alot of cake AND ice cream with that.

pez wrote:Economic stimulae of this variety is exceedingly dumb... Take that money and start a new civilian conservation corps... of look long term and invest it in our schools instead.... Id rather have the 3rd best military in the world at the expense of having the best schools.

with unemployment at 6.1%, lets put some f'ing people to work.

While I have a problem with having the 3rd best military in the world. I would rather see it in jobs programs building bridges, roads, rail lines, building schools.

pez wrote:Economic stimulae of this variety is exceedingly dumb... Take that money and start a new civilian conservation corps... of look long term and invest it in our schools instead.... Id rather have the 3rd best military in the world at the expense of having the best schools.

with unemployment at 6.1%, lets put some f'ing people to work.

Amen. Think of all the things that could be done with the money wasted in Iraq and on Halliburton.

Jugomugo wrote:

pez wrote:Economic stimulae of this variety is exceedingly dumb... Take that money and start a new civilian conservation corps... of look long term and invest it in our schools instead.... Id rather have the 3rd best military in the world at the expense of having the best schools.

with unemployment at 6.1%, lets put some f'ing people to work.

Amen. Think of all the things that could be done with the money wasted in Iraq and on Halliburton.

Yeah, we could have used that to rebuild all of the additional buildings that the terrorists would have blown up...

Cincy Fan 44 wrote:

Jugomugo wrote:

pez wrote:Economic stimulae of this variety is exceedingly dumb... Take that money and start a new civilian conservation corps... of look long term and invest it in our schools instead.... Id rather have the 3rd best military in the world at the expense of having the best schools.

with unemployment at 6.1%, lets put some f'ing people to work.

Amen. Think of all the things that could be done with the money wasted in Iraq and on Halliburton.

Yeah, we could have used that to rebuild all of the additional buildings that the terrorists would have blown up...

Riiiiiiiight.