Average person's take on the stimulus...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by fivepoint, Feb 12, 2009.

  1. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #1
    "You're getting $600. What can you do with that??? You go out and you buy a pair of earrings."
    -Average Lady in the News

    What do you think about the stimulus money? Thoughts from the community?
     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    The way things are going, you could probably buy a house with it.
     
  3. rhsgolfer33 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    #3
    Definitely in Detroit.
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    I used mine last year to help me buy a new BlackBook.

    As far as what the stimulus will do- I really don't know.
     
  5. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #5
    I could do a lot more with it than buy one pair of earrings, that's for sure.
     
  6. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
  7. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #7
    $600 is not going to do much. If it was $5,000 that would do more.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    You have expensive taste in earrings, darling.
     
  9. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #9
    Hopefully my dad will use part of it to live up to his end of the bargain and match what Ive earned towards my first mac (macbook 13").

    That, or he will like he did the last stimulus, pay off yet another month of the mortgage ahead of schedule.
     
  10. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #10
    Before we go any further... I think I should let you guys in on my little joke. :) That 'average lady' was actually Michelle Obama in July of 2008, talking about Bush's tax cuts from 6 months ago.




    Anyway, besides wondering what changed between then and now... I think it is actually a good discussion to have on whether or not the proposed tax cuts (well, actually 'rebates' or 'stimulus' or whatever since many of the people receiving them never paid the income taxes in the first place) are enough, in the sense of making a dent in the current problem. Obviously the first attempt didn't work out so well. Will this spending do a good enough job stimulating anything, or will most people simply put it in their savings account like I'm planning on doing?
     
  11. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #11
    So she's not an average lady at all. In fact she's a rather exceptional lady.

    So this is another thread raising the same questions about the stimulus to go along with all the others? I think you'll find this has already been discussed :confused:.
     
  12. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    No- before we go any further, who are these people who "never paid the income taxes in the first place"? I want hard numbers, please- not the "lower 40%". I want to know what the income cut off is for "never paid the income taxes" is. Thanks.
     
  13. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #13
    But Lee, "lower 40%" IS the answer. Go to www.irs.gov and see for yourself. Look up the income tax brackets and you'll see that the bottom 40% of wage earners pay zero percent of their income in taxes. This is well known information, a quick google search would put this to rest.
     
  14. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #14

    Wasnt the first attempt merely just tax cuts/rebates to people?

    This go around we are actually trying to be productive as well as better the country. I dont really get how you can casually label this as "the second attempt".
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    As I've noted several times, tax cuts are the least effective form of stimulus.
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    I'm sorry- that doesn't work for me. What is the income cut-off?

    Ok- did it for you:

    http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_40_percent_of_americans_pay_no.html

    Well, how interesting.
     
  17. That-Is-Bull macrumors 6502

    That-Is-Bull

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Edmond, Oklahoma
    #17
    Buy 100 cups of coffee!

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #18
    Actually, tax cuts for business would indeed save jobs and/or help create jobs. The U.S. corporate tax rate is 40%, compared to around 23% overseas. And, a lot of tax avoidance for U.S. companies has come from "shipping jobs overseas".

    http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36986

    In a time of declining volumes of business, reducing the overhead of taxation could allow retention of workers who otherwise would be laid off. Depending on the sector, it could lead to investment in new equipment or hiring more people--as not all sectors are in decline.

    Giving money to those who pay little or no taxes is merely contributing to the consumeritis which helped get us into this mess. Palliative, for a short time, but nowhere being worth doing. It just adds to the deficit. When the money's spent in a few short weeks, then what?
     
  19. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #19
    The corporate tax rate is 40%? Wow- then I find this very interesting:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1249465620080812

    Here's another link to ABC:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=5561455
     
  20. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #20
    leekohler you need to remember a lot of US corpations are sub sections S corporations.

    Hell the company I work for is a subsections S corporation and does little over 2 billions a year bussiness. It has not paid a dime in taxes for at least 8 years.

    Reason being it subsections S diverts all Taxes to the owners. It happens to be an Employee owned company and the ownership is in a tax differentiable retirement account.

    Either way sub sections S corporations do not pay taxes because it is diverted to the owners. People get all up in arms about that but when you REALLY look into it they are use the total number of companies out there for that % but people think of corporations as the big bad guy like Microsoft. They think Microsoft and apple are not paying taxes with is a load of crap.

    As for the 600 bucks last year end up being 600 of tax credit for me in 2008 and reduces me from paying the government close to 600 to a 11 dollar refund. that extra 600 ended up in my savings account when it was all said and done.
     
  21. NoSmokingBandit macrumors 68000

    NoSmokingBandit

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2008
    #21
    The governement needs to realize that they cant create jobs. Companies create jobs, not the government, so instead of passing bills that cost all of us money let us keep our money and spend it how we see fit instead of how washington wants us to spend it.


    Also:
    Wtf $600. I have not heard of this. Or are you referring to the stimulus checks from last year?
     
  22. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    I didn't say anything bout specific companies. Those numbers are what they are. I didn't make them up. If the corporate tax rate is 40%, it really doesn't matter if most companies pay nothing, now does it? You can't tell me ALL of those companies are subsection S.

    That's completely false. You're trying to tell me that there are no jobs the government has created? I can think of a ton of them, and they've been around a very long time.
     
  23. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #23

    Lee, not to be mean or anything... but it's clear that tax law is not your strong suit. A few days ago you tried telling us that the rich do not pay higher income tax as a percentage than normal people do and that poor people certainly paid their fair share of income tax.

    Now you're trying to suggest that America doesn't have high tax code on businesses. Both of these suggestions are uderly false, and represent a complete misunderstanding of the system.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Again, not trying to be mean, but I would suggest a little more research and fundamental understanding before you try telling people how you the government isn't redistributing wealth and that the poor carry a heavier tax burden than the rich.

    You're beginning to teeter on the absurd with some of your statements. It's not a big deal if you don't know the truth, but don't try telling us who do that we're wrong. It just doesn't make any sense.
     
  24. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #24
    Not to be mean or anything, but you have not addressed the fact that many US companies pay no taxes at all, in which case the theoretical rate is irrelevant. As for private citizens, the overall tax burden is more relevant than that of income tax specifically.
     
  25. fivepoint thread starter macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #25
    For the most part, the companies were't paying taxes because they accrued all of their expenses in a short condensed period, ensuring that they paid less taxes immediately, and more taxes in the subsequent years to compensate for the discrepancy. I won't get into the specifics.

    As for the companies who don't pay taxes because of governmental loop holes and tax breaks... that's not their fault, that's your government's fault. They're doing everything within the law. I'm a believer in a system that generally does not prop up failing industries and doesn't subsidize failure or non-competitiveness... so you've got my vote on that part.

    The thing is... all of this doesn't matter because "not paying taxes for one year" doesn't mean anything since ALL of their income is being taxed eventually. The implication that corporations somehow don't pay their 'fair share' is laughable. American has probably the single most burdensome corporate tax code in the modern world.

    Desertrat was right. And I will add that the politics of victimization is very sad in deed.


     

Share This Page