What will you do with your economic stimulus package check?
I haven't been following the various plans that have been tossed around DC that closely. I know that one just passed the House. The last I heard, a few days ago, the plan was giving $600 to individuals, $1200 to couples, and $300 for each kid. Under that plan, my household would be getting a check for $1800. The plan that just passed the House may be different.
I shake my head and wonder about this. I won't be declining the money, but doubt it will do much. A fluff article in this morning's paper was interviewing the man on the street, and everyone was saying they would pay existing bills with the money. Many mentioned paying off Christmas credit card debt.
Perfect topic for a Cellar poll. What will you do with your check if you get one?
Comments welcome. I'm torn between buying new gutters for the house, and getting a new TV made in China better than the ones I've been looking at already. But I'd probably save it for a little while first, and think about it.
What will you do?
[SIZE="5"]Poll is multiple choice. Vote for more than one, if you want.[/SIZE]
I'll believe it when I see it. I put save, since I'm trying to buy a house.
If it comes through in May like they say it might, it will go towards my "vacation" in New Jersey visiting my family.
I don't have any debts and my monthly rent and utilities are pretty low.
Paying a few bills, and the rest toward a trip to Oregon in June
Depends on when I get it. Still have some credit card bills from Christmas. Also, looking to buy a home, so it will help towards closing costs, down payment, etc., or to replace the savings I'm depleting to put the down payment on the house.
I won't get one. And it pisses me off because I will have to pay for everyone elses. WAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaa....... :D
The whole idea is stupid. It is borrowed money that everyone of us will have to pay back in some way.
my $300 rebate went to the 9-11 relief fund.
I'll probably loan the money to someone in the 3rd world via kiva.org.
I will laugh and laugh as I think of how much I've paid in taxes over the years and realize that it's a big bunch of crapola.
I'm putting it all in the tip jar...
...unless it's already full.
I like it!!!
[COLOR="Red"]EVERYONE DONATE TO THE TIP JAR![/COLOR]
I'm freakin pissed that we won't get one, because I totally would have stimulated the economy AND created jobs with it. Or bought a rug. From China... damnit.
:mad2:
Join the club girl friend. And you know that we will just have to pay it back.
I'm no economist, but so far, it's looking like this money isn't going to be terribly effective at short term stimulation of the economy. Saving and paying off credit card debt are good to do, but which portion of today's economy is that stimulating?
Instead of giving 100 million people $1500, it would be much more effective if they gave 150,000 people one million dollars.
Instead of giving 100 million people $1500, it would be much more effective if they gave 150,000 people one million dollars.
Yeah, they do that already. It's called corporate welfare, or tax breaks for the rich, so they can keep their money to stimulate the economy with.
Flint, the 150,000 included you, of course.
I checked "durable goods," since it will get lumped in with the money needed to trade in the two-seater truck for a vehicle that can hold more than myself and a toddler at once.
But I haven't been following the news on this in the slightest. Those of you who say you won't get one, what disqualifies you? For all I know I won't be getting one either...
How do you know if you are getting a check or not?
It calls for tax rebates of up to $600 for individuals and $1,200 for couples, with the payments phased out for individuals earning more than $75,000 and couples earning more than $150,000.
It would provide a minimum payment of $300 for individuals paying less than that in income taxes who show earned income of at least $3,000. And it would provide an additional payment of $300 a child for all families receiving a payment.
At this point, it's all talk, but there seems to be bipartisan agreement, and Bush promises to sign a stimulus package into law. But it hasn't passed yet, so there is no guarantee that it will happen. It looks very likely though.
They are talking about individual taxpayers making less than $75k getting $600 and taxpaying couples making under $150K getting $1200. Non-taxpayers would get smaller checks. $300 and $600. Also there would be $300 per kid under 18.
Edit: What barefoot said.
Of freaking course...EIC ain't enough incentive.:headshake
Gotcha.....hmmm. Looks like I am eligible. And I know just where that moola is going if I get any......CREDIT CARDS!!
Whats EIC?
(can you tell I don't pay attention to taxes? This is the first year I will be doing them myself)
Here's
a bit more detail, indicating the end of the phaseout block.
Those making at least $3,000 a year would be eligible to receive a check for $300. Those who pay income tax (earning approximately $50,000 a year and up for a two-income couple), would receive $1,200 rebates per family, or $600 for an individual, plus an additional $300 per child. These rebates would be phased out gradually for families with incomes between $150,000 and $178,000 a year (or for individuals with incomes between $75,000 and $87,000). Wealthier individuals and families would receive no rebate.
bbro...EIC is earned income credit...not a bad thing really, just you wouldn't believe the profits I see people make. But, I'm just bitter today.
lol...if I made 75-80/year I would consider myself pretty freaking wealthy! :)
lol...if I made 75-80/year I would consider myself pretty freaking wealthy! :)
no you wouldn't. you would simply have a lifestyle more than capable of consuming that income.
Yep, money doesn't buy happiness, but it's much better to cry in a Porsche.
Besides, yes, I would spend more, but I doubt I would change my rather bohemian lifestyle too much...I just wouldn't have to worry about bills getting paid. I'm not a "I need and want everything" kind of girl.
So, yeah, I'm pretty sure I would consider myself to be pretty freaking wealthy.
I've been thinking of nurturing a heroin addiction. This seems like a good way to get started.
you should try meth first Griff. It is a lot cheaper and just as easy to get off if you decide to be a quitter.
no you wouldn't. you would simply have a lifestyle more than capable of consuming that income.
What he said.
Wealth? What is it?
I know we have all had this discussion before in one thread or another.
Wealth is relative, sort of like Velocity, ask Zen.
Why choose? The Feds are buying.
Yeah, Griff, you seem more like a simple cocaine guy to me. plus you'll get more done around Grifftopia than you would on heroin.
Why choose? The Feds are buying.
No they are not. The tax payer is, and they will be coming for it in about 12 months with a vengence.
Okay, I'm still confused. But whatever, if I get it, it's going to credit cards, if I don't then I don't :)
No they are not. The tax payer is, and they will be coming for it in about 12 months with a vengence.
Shush! The great minds in Washington came up with this, it's fool proof.
Yeah, Griff, you seem more like a simple cocaine guy to me. plus you'll get more done around Grifftopia than you would on heroin.
Hmmm... it is a stimulus package. I hate to violate the spirit of the thing.
Okay, I'm still confused. But whatever, if I get it, it's going to credit cards, if I don't then I don't :)
It is income based. You make x you get it. You make x+Y you get it and more. You make x+y+z it is reduced. You make x+y+z+w you no longer get it.
Where x = $3000
You solve it from there.
Pretty simple.
Okay, I'm still confused. But whatever, if I get it, it's going to credit cards, if I don't then I don't :)
I don't know your $$ details, but based on what you said in your credit card debt thread, you are probably going to get $600.
You make 3000 a year you get 300
You make 50000 a year you get 600 (unless you are couple earning then you get 1200 + 300 per kid)
You make 75000 and the amount you get goes down.
You make 150000 as couple the amount goes down.
You make greater than 178000 you get nothing.
You make 50000 a year you get 600 (unless you are couple earning then you get 1200 + 300 per kid)
Really? You have to jump the 50000 hurdle to get the $600? I thought you just had to pay some federal taxes.
Edit: Not that any of this is finalized into law.
There a couple of plans being proposed. Some Dem, some Rep. They will have to fight it out and figure out the details.
We have a similar scheme here in Australia which has been in effect for a number of years now. Essentially lower income earners, around the same figures you're being quoted there although the top end is about $90k for families here. The general idea is that it's paid to families with children. What you get is $600/child at the end of the financial year.
We don't qualify for it because Dazza earns over the threshold, but when I was a single parent it really helped a lot. It made a world of difference to Christmas for the kids that's for sure.
90k in Aust is probably worth 150k here. At least it will be when they print those checks.
We have a similar scheme here in Australia which has been in effect for a number of years now. Essentially lower income earners, around the same figures you're being quoted there although the top end is about $90k for families here. The general idea is that it's paid to families with children. What you get is $600/child at the end of the financial year.
We don't qualify for it because Dazza earns over the threshold, but when I was a single parent it really helped a lot. It made a world of difference to Christmas for the kids that's for sure.
You get $600 for each child?
I think you could get more for them on the black market.
Unless they're ugly or have an unusual odor.
I'm sorry. That wasn't nice.
I didn't see hire someone as an option on the poll. How is this brainstorm stimulating the economy again? Oh, maybe it'll be we have $600 lets go splurge??? I don't think so.
Well, hooker was in the first choice.
Well, hooker was in the first choice.
Yes, but only one person is planning to use those services.
No they are not. The tax payer is, and they will be coming for it in about 12 months with a vengence.
I'd heard that they were trying to make it non taxable this time.
I also heard that if you make 155k or more, you get bupkiss.
the phasing out part is intriguing.
The tax payer is, and they will be coming for it in about 12 months with a vengence.
It’s still called drug addiction. Once we had a surplus due to responsible government. George Jr (Cheney) decided we needed economic stimulus. So the economy has been running on economic stimulus packages for seven years now. As a result, we have significant inflation and massive debts everywhere. The average American is now spending 104% of his income annually. More drug addiction. Don't worry. Be happy.
We promote 'core inflation' numbers to those who know by worshipping a political agenda. Those numbers say inflation does not exist. With more stimulus packages, home prices doubled. Accounting fraud (including SIVs and other Enron techniques) became acceptable because it "helps the economy". More 'stimulus' avocated by a political agenda.
Eventually stimulus packages will no longer mask economic reality. Economics must take revenge meaning a larger recession looms. No problem. Hand out more money (no different from a tax cut) because throwing money at problems always solves everything. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter" - the political agenda. Agenda works on people who know what is told rather than use intelligence. Those outstanding bills come due four and ten years later. So the political agenda pretends those bills do not exist (even 'emergency spending' bills that do not appear on the budget - more economic stimulus).
Who is paying these bills for 2002 economic stimulus packages? Bills just starting to appear in the form of record debt, increasing inflation, the threat of stagflation, and selling America to foreigners.
So what do we do? Another economic stimulus package. Does anyone learn from the history - or did UG rewrite it? Same techniques created 1970s stagflation and a massive reduction in the American standard of living. No problem. Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. So many liberals (who call themselves conservatives) promote more voodoo economics. They are told economic stimulus packages have no downside - just like heroine.
Indicators of 'denied' economic recession included housing prices that doubled. To fix America, housing prices must return to where they belong, OR economics takes revenge elsewhere. Instead we throw more money mostly at those who created this mess. Go figure. But that is liberal economics that wacko liberals promoted in the 1970s and wacko conservatives promote today. Deja vue.
Any responsible economist knows (professional or amateur), only useful tax cut coincides with a spending reductions. A fact iterated by both John McCain and Warren Buffet. Both men have a history of using intellgence rather than a political agenda. Another stimulus package will not cure the problem: too many government stimulus packages that even included a bridge to nowhere. Amazing how many Americans would deny economic heroine addiction.
How did we solve the addiction last time? 20+% interest rates. How many learned that lesson from history - or would rather repeat it?
Due to unfulfilled student loan indebtedness, we won't be seeing ours. Like our income tax refund.
From The Economist of 26 January 2008:
There is no doubt that this is a frightening moment. But the narrow economic rationale for the Fed's emergency rate-cut this week was thin. America's weak economy means monetary policy can, and should, be loosened considerably. But the central bankers' next scheduled meeting begins on January 29th. Since lower interest rates take several months to work through the economy, accelerating rate cuts by a few days will not much affect the outcome. Yes, share prices had been falling sharply across the globe, but the slide was orderly and the system had not seized up. The Fed seems to have been spooked, and wanted to stop the markets' fall.
That is a dangerous path for a central bank to tread. Its success will now be identified with short-term movements on Wall Street. Indeed, as the stockmarket shrugged off the latest rate cut, the Fed's authority already looked diminished. As if to prove the point, shares soared only when the insurance regulator appeared. Ben Bernanke, Fed chairman and guardian of America's economy, moved Wall Street less than Eric Dinallo, whom nobody had heard of, saying he would rescue some insurers nobody understood.
Identified is what a responsible government can (should) do. Intead, a mental midget president would throw more money at a problem created by throwing money at the economy?
Due to unfulfilled student loan indebtedness, we won't be seeing ours. Like our income tax refund.
Is it automatically applied to the debt?
It’s still called drug addiction.
Good Lord, tw and I are in agreement.:thepain:
Yeah... but after 5k posts he had to be right, sooner or later.
I don't know what I will do with it until it's in my hands... I'll believe it when I see it.