Stop thinking of the rebates as "them buying us off"

[electron_blue]

We're looking at this all wrong. It's not that we have been bought or "whored", but we have power in our pocketbooks.

This rebate is not to quiet the masses. The masses, are in fact, already pretty quiet right now. There are no large protests going on. They're not under the gun, although they should be. And just look at how fast all sides managed to cooperate and get this done. They really really want us to have this money. Why?

Just *think* of what all we, as citizens, could accomplish if we refused to spend, oh, $600 this year that we otherwise would. This would scare the hell out of the politicians. Apparently the economy would tank. This would get their attention more than anything else we, as prospective voters, have done so far. This is where we really have control.

They don't care what we think of them as long as we keep spending money.

Remember how we were encouraged to get back to shopping right after 9/11? That disgusted me and I have never forgotten it.

[patrice]

1. GREAT! K & R!

Save that money!

That's what my crazy Libertarian husband says.

[havocmom]

3. Save the money, you may well need it to pay surprise tax debt come April 09

This payout is just more CORPORATE WELFARE and we end up paying twice. If we use the 'rebate' (which is actually a PRE-bait &switch) to buy things we need, we are paying the money to the giant CORPORATIONS that run things. Then, next April 15, we end up paying taxes instead of getting a return.

Seems like we are giving ourselves an interest free loan NOW to hand over to the Big Business that owns the WH & most of the Congress, then we still have that money to pay back.

And let us not forget, that in April of 09, when Americans are enraged at the surprise of OWING taxes instead of getting a little refund, DEMS will be in the WH and more numerous on the Hill. DEMs will be taking the heat for the rage of the people.

Why the hell the DEMs on the Hill now fall for this crap OVER AND OVER is beyond me. We do need to get some DEM candidates for Congress who actually learn from their mistakes. :grr:

[fishwax]

7. the story I read said it was not like the 2001 rebates

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-te.stimulus25jan25,0,7365441.story

"Most workers - those who will pay at least $600 in federal taxes for 2007 - would receive a $600 rebate if they filed individually and $1,200 if they filed a joint return. Unlike a similar stimulus program in 2001, the money is an outright payment, not an advance or offset against the next year's tax filing."

[asjr]

2. I wonder which country this administration

will borrow from to pay for all this.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

4. See, It's Things Like This That Make Me Disappointed To Be Here Sometimes.

This package by far isn't perfect and many of the criticisms are well founded, but at the end of the day the economy does need a boost and that should be something we all support in theory. Now granted, we may argue and bicker over the merits of this package, but I would find attempts to thwart the intended purpose of it to be a bit irresponsible. The whole point is to assist in stimulating the economy and in some ways this should. Why would you want to intentionally hamper the economy? Doesn't much make sense.

[Lex]

5. I know. Why doesn't he just shut-up and do like they say?

Sheesh.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. That Ain't What It's About.

That's a pretty simple-minded way of presenting this debate, turning it into a "yes, bow to your masters and do as they say!" type argument.

The fact is that so many here are always yammering about how bad the economy is, and some come across to me as almost ROOTING for the economy to fail, and is if they're disappointed whenever the economy doesn't quite fail as much as they had wanted. I've always found that tone to be a bit disgusting. Now sure, this package isn't gonna be some be all end all cure to the economy. We know that. But it should at least help a little, and we should at least be able to support that concept. Purposely trying to convince people to thwart the efforts of stimulating the economy is just not something I condone. Now granted, people should of course use the money how they see fit and for their own reasons. But it is the concept behind this thread in which I find distaste; and that's the concept of trying to defeat the efforts to help improve the economy, just because of some childish bitterness towards the administration, parties or whatever.

The economy needs a boost. Even an imperfect temporary solution, that may only do a little, should at least be supported in merit.

[electron_blue]

10. I didn't post this to be childish. At best this is only a short-term fix.

The fact is most low and middle-income Americans are deeply in debt and floundering. $600 is not going to significantly change most of these people's experience in 2008. And the poor will still be poor after this.

I think it is remarkable that the "health" of the economy seems to hinge so much on a relatively small amount of money in the hands of millions. This is empowering. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out.

Furthermore, I see nothing wrong with suggesting some spending restraint as a way to get the attention of the Rep and Dem leaders on important issues, such as the Constitutional crisis, Iraq War, Global Warming - take your pick. Our spending seems to be the only thing they care about. We vote so seldom that we may as well be powerless in that regard (never mind the election hacking issues), but buying?! We do that every day.

I find it disgusting that the government is so blatantly encouraging consumerism on top of all our other problems.

[walldude]

13. I'm no economist but

giving away money that you don't have to boost an economy that is failing because you are spending too much money is... kinda stupid.

[NashVegas]

9. All It Is Is Borrowed Time

The US treasury - already in the red - is being further raided in hopes that US consumers will go spend 600 dollars on goods that cost $300 to manufacture (if that). Of the other $300, $40-$55 goes to state treasuries (unless you live in NH) and the other $200 + goes straight to once again bailing out the top 10%.

Tell me again who this rebate is supposed to benefit? And it's only going to be a temporary reprieve.

Sooner or later the business world is going to have to pay off its debts, just as governments are going to have to. Where's it going to come from?

[conscious evolution]

11. I prefer to bypass

the official economy.
Granted there are things I must purchase from the large corporations due to their monopolys but when I have a choice I go with small local independent merchants.

[zorahopkins]

6. Good Advice!

I had thought I would spend my money on a worthy cause.

But I think you are correct -- that is exactly what Bush and his corrupt gang of thugs want us all to do.

I think I will just save my money.

[bdamomma]

12. it is really *'s way of treating us like shit, throw them slaves

(which we all are now) some scraps and that will keep them quiet. I find this action highly insulting and does not help the economy at all. Not at all, this little man thinks if he gives us money we will bring back the economy, boy he is really delusional.