The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Rebates For Most! (Now With Better OPpage!)

AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
edited March 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
So, as you may have heard, a deal on the economic stimulus plan has been brokered. And with any deal, there's the good, the bad, and the ugly:
  • The Good: Rebates! Under this plan, working and middle class Americans will get the lions share of the rebates. The deal is surprisingly progressive, with people under the minimum tax bracket receiving $300, which increases with income to a high of $600 for most earners. Couples can potentially earn up to $1,200. The scale also tapers off at the top, with high-income earners starting at around $75K beginning to see diminishing rebates. Children will also count towards the rebate, with a potential $300 for each.
  • The Bad: Support programs get the shaft. Initial drafts on the Democratic side had as part of the package moderate increases for programs such as food stamps, Medicare, and LIHEAP. These increases were left on the dealroom floor, sadly.
  • The Ugly: Impact will be scattershot at best. The issues with the economy run deeper than just a lack of consumer confidence. While the infusion of money will help somewhat, how much is up in the air, and a matter for concern.

XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
AngelHedgie on
«134

Posts

  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    The funny thing about it is that I've seen a lot of people go "hey, new big screen TV!" Guess where most of that money is going to go.
    Big box stores and overseas.

    I mean, it's awesome that we are all getting some cash back, but I don't think that the $600 is going to get someone out of a shitty mortgage situation for more than a month or encourage anyone to buy a house.

    Doc on
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    This won't do a hell of a lot, but it's basically a free payment on my student loans. And I might treat myself to a small ($50 range) consumer splurge. So yeah, I guess.

    werehippy on
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Meh.
    I'm a "high-income earner." (Even though for this area I'm solidly middle class.)
    When the checks are supposed to go out in June, I'm probably going to owe a tax payment, so I probably won't see any real money, it'll just get deducted from the amount I owe.
    I'd rather they used the money to treat the mentally ill or something like that.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Just Like ThatJust Like That Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'm going to buy a bunch of drugs and OD on 'em
    This actually reminds me of that Chapelle's Show skit about reparations.... "I've got enough cigarettes to last me and my family the rest of my life!"

    Just Like That on
  • ScooterScooter Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I've heard it suggested that we'll have to pay taxes on this income in 2009. Is that right?


    Looks like I'm getting one textbook for a summer course.

    Scooter on
  • FatsFats Corvallis, ORRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Oh boy, I can pay my state taxes. How exciting.

    Fats on
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Scooter wrote: »
    I've heard it suggested that we'll have to pay taxes on this income in 2009. Is that right?


    Looks like I'm getting one textbook for a summer course.

    I assume not, because the last time the administration gave us a summer tax rebate, it wasn't taxable income.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Feral wrote: »
    Scooter wrote: »
    I've heard it suggested that we'll have to pay taxes on this income in 2009. Is that right?


    Looks like I'm getting one textbook for a summer course.

    I assume not, because the last time the administration gave us a summer tax rebate, it wasn't taxable income.

    I'm not positive, but I'm FAIRLY sure that tax returns aren't counted as income at all.

    werehippy on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    DAmn. Food stamps would have been a shot in the arm.
    Is it considered in bad taste to give middle class people food stamps instead of rebates?

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Scalfin wrote: »
    DAmn. Food stamps would have been a shot in the arm.
    Is it considered in bad taste to give middle class people food stamps instead of rebates?

    A) Food stamps don't exist anymore. They give you a plastic card, like a debit card. Ever go to the supermarket and see the option for "EBT" after "Debit" and "Credit?" That's food stamps.

    B) They're distributed by the county. The administrative costs for sending out checks to every taxpayer are minimal. The adminstrative costs for sending out food stamps (or EBT cards) to people who have never received them before would be significantly more.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    iPhone!

    (Not really. Only if they release a 16GB version...)

    Satan. on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    They should fucking invert that, so the lowest earners get the biggest rebates, since they'll be the ones buying the most goods with it.

    Thanatos on
  • cliffskicliffski Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Absolutely. It's mental to give $600 to people who may well just stash it in the bank. Poor people spend everything they get, if you want to boost consumer spending, you give money to the poor, that's just common sense. Plus the middle classes are more likely to spend it on foreign holidays or imported electrical goods, which helps nobody in the USA.
    Poor people would buy more and better food, and maybe go to a local bar, restaurant, take-out or watch a movie, basically EXACTLY what you need if you want to bump the domestic economy.

    cliffski on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    cliffski wrote: »
    Absolutely. It's mental to give $600 to people who may well just stash it in the bank. Poor people spend everything they get, if you want to boost consumer spending, you give money to the poor, that's just common sense. Plus the middle classes are more likely to spend it on foreign holidays or imported electrical goods, which helps nobody in the USA.
    Poor people would buy more and better food, and maybe go to a local bar, restaurant, take-out or watch a movie, basically EXACTLY what you need if you want to bump the domestic economy.

    Well, ideally, you want to give the money to the people who are most likely to use it as expendable income or re-invest in the economy. In a rational context, anyone who would have benefited from food stamps in this deal doesn't need $600 worth of expendible income, they need $600 of housing rent or medical insurance or something vital to themselves or their families. I hate to see that part of the deal being scrapped.

    It's the Katrina/FEMA theory. Don't give lots of free money to people who don't know how to spend it properly.

    Atomika on
  • HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Huh, interesting.

    Guess I'll be picking up a 360 and maybe even splurge a little and use some of my own cash for Rock Band while I'm at it. I really should use it to clear out the $100 or so that's on my overdraft protection and then put the rest in savings but clearly it's my duty as an upstanding citizen to put the money back into the economy.

    Or at least that's the justification I'll use in my mind to finally pick up one of the next gen consoles :P

    HappylilElf on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Guess I'll be picking up a 360 . . . clearly it's my duty as an upstanding citizen to put the money back into the economy.

    Yeah, because you know who needs your cash? Bill Gates.


    ;-)

    Atomika on
  • ZeroCowZeroCow Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'm going to Vegas BABY! Whoo!

    Actually that is where my money will most likely go, but that has more to do with the fact that I'm getting married there than the gambling aspects.

    ZeroCow on
    PSN ID - Buckeye_Bert
    Magic Online - Bertro
  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    What would be the best way to spend the money so that it stimulates the American economy?

    Shinto on
  • mastmanmastman Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    mine is going to the casino boats.


    more specifically, all on black.

    mastman on
    ByalIX8.png
    B.net: Kusanku
  • WetsunWetsun Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Wetsun on
    XBL/Steam: Wetsun
  • OctoparrotOctoparrot Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    cliffski wrote: »
    It's mental to give $600 to people who may well just stash it in the bank.

    Exactly where it's going, too!

    Octoparrot on
  • WetsunWetsun Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Student loans, or maybe toward an engagement ring.

    Wetsun on
    XBL/Steam: Wetsun
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Shinto wrote: »
    What would be the best way to spend the money so that it stimulates the American economy?

    Go to Main St and buy stuff. That is if it still exists in your town.

    Malkor on
    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    Guess I'll be picking up a 360 . . . clearly it's my duty as an upstanding citizen to put the money back into the economy.

    Yeah, because you know who needs your cash? Bill Gates.


    ;-)
    Ah, to be ignorant again.

    Satan. on
  • chamberlainchamberlain Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Free money should be exciting!

    Of course, my $1800 will just go towards paying half of my outrageous property tax bill for next year.

    chamberlain on
  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    Thinatos wrote: »
    They should fucking invert that, so the lowest earners get the biggest rebates, since they'll be the ones buying the most goods with it.

    Republicans see this more as tax relief I'd bet.

    Shinto on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Ah, to be ignorant again.

    It's a joke.

    Please don't post a .pdf detailing Microsoft's profit margins and the distribution thereof.

    Atomika on
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    Ah, to be ignorant again.

    It's a joke.

    Please don't post a .pdf detailing Microsoft's profit margins and the distribution thereof.
    I could but next time you might want to indicate your sarcasm a little bit better around here. May I suggest a :P?

    Satan. on
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I could but next time you might want to indicate your sarcasm a little bit better around here. May I suggest a :P?

    I used the winking emoticon, didn't I?

    Is there some protocol I'm failing to grasp?

    Atomika on
  • TachTach Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Yeah- straight to the savings account for our $1200. That townhouse isn't going to buy itself, y'know.

    Tach on
  • mugginnsmugginns Jawsome Fresh CoastRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Thinatos wrote: »
    They should fucking invert that, so the lowest earners get the biggest rebates, since they'll be the ones buying the most goods with it.

    You mean the people who pay the least amount of taxes or even don't pay income tax at all?

    I see giving tax rebates to the people who don't even pay taxes as a pretty huge concession. I don't know what the portion of the population that reflects is though. I'll probably use half to pay of bills and splurge half of mine.

    mugginns on
    E26cO.jpg
  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    cliffski wrote: »
    Absolutely. It's mental to give $600 to people who may well just stash it in the bank. Poor people spend everything they get, if you want to boost consumer spending, you give money to the poor, that's just common sense. Plus the middle classes are more likely to spend it on foreign holidays or imported electrical goods, which helps nobody in the USA.
    Poor people would buy more and better food, and maybe go to a local bar, restaurant, take-out or watch a movie, basically EXACTLY what you need if you want to bump the domestic economy.

    You realize that once the bank has your money, it doesn't just sit there, right? They invest it and make money on it. Putting money in a bank could be better for the economy than buying a TV or whatever, since the banks are the ones really hurting.

    Doc on
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Hmmm, not really sure what to do with this money whenever it comes. I really need to get my car fixed, so maybe that. If I could, though, I'd take mine and my wife's and put it in savings or a CD, or maybe even some stock. Just buying frivolous shit isn't going to help my household, but putting it away in investments so I don't just blow it on goods with depreciating value will.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Doc wrote: »
    cliffski wrote: »
    Absolutely. It's mental to give $600 to people who may well just stash it in the bank. Poor people spend everything they get, if you want to boost consumer spending, you give money to the poor, that's just common sense. Plus the middle classes are more likely to spend it on foreign holidays or imported electrical goods, which helps nobody in the USA.
    Poor people would buy more and better food, and maybe go to a local bar, restaurant, take-out or watch a movie, basically EXACTLY what you need if you want to bump the domestic economy.

    You realize that once the bank has your money, it doesn't just sit there, right? They invest it and make money on it. Putting money in a bank could be better for the economy than buying a TV or whatever, since the banks are the ones really hurting.

    If the economy was ticking along normally this would be a valid point (it is in general, but this is a one off). The main (or one of the main) reasons people are freaked out about the economy is that banks AREN'T moving their money around, they're sitting on cash reserves. With so much uncertainty in the air banks have become extremely tight with their credit.

    werehippy on
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Hmmm, not really sure what to do with this money whenever it comes. I really need to get my car fixed, so maybe that. If I could, though, I'd take mine and my wife's and put it in savings or a CD, or maybe even some stock. Just buying frivolous shit isn't going to help my household, but putting it away in investments so I don't just blow it on goods with depreciating value will.

    Actually, if things really do go into the shitter over the next 6 - 12 months, buying stocks could be a good idea. A sharp fall in the market will tend to irrationally pull down even solid stocks, and you can pick up really solid stocks at pretty deep discounts, giving you both the return they'd normally provide and an extra whatever-the-market-fell% return.

    werehippy on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited January 2008
    I guess I'm getting less that $600 because of the $75k cutoff but it sounds like I'm still getting something. Frankie was complaining that they should use the money for something involving fixing the government or infrastructure instead of just cutting a bunch of checks, but admitted that she'd probably end up blowing it on something she doesn't really need.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • NewtonNewton Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    This whole plan seems really shortsighted and stupid. The country would be better off if the government made an attempt at reducing the national debt instead of increasing it by another $150B. It looks like we're probably getting $1500 back, which will be going straight into the bank. At least we can be fiscally responsible even if the government can't.

    Newton on
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Irond Will wrote: »
    admitted that she'd probably end up blowing it on something she doesn't really need.
    Isn't that kind of the point, though?

    deadonthestreet on
  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    I don't see what the problem is with borrowing money from China, then giving it to people and telling them to blow it on stuff they really don't need.

    Doc on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited January 2008
    Irond Will wrote: »
    admitted that she'd probably end up blowing it on something she doesn't really need.
    Isn't that kind of the point, though?
    I guess so. Most of her money seems to go for, like, yarn or shit from Etsy (which I guess is probably a best-case sort of deal for economic stimulus since it goes wholesale into the pockets of impoverished hippies who will spend the money on Fair Trade granola or locally grown alfalfa sprouts or some shit) or else gadgets and gizmos from Apple or video games (both of which would probably trickle some money into corporate coffers and not do much in terms of economic stimulus).

    Mine would go into my bank account. I looked into transferring some cash from my checking to savings account at my credit union and was told that the interest rate on savings was 00.6%. That's a 1-year yield of sixty cents on a hundred dollars. Wheee

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
Sign In or Register to comment.