Like it or not, you’re about to get a big ol’ heaping “stimulus package”. The only question is what it’s goign to look like. The figure being bandied around most is in the neighborhood is $150 billion, which is an awful lot of stimulus.
Congressional leaders continued to negotiate the details of the deal — which is expected to include a rebate of between $300 and $800 for taxpayers — and said they hope to reach an agreement within a month.
Mr. Bush avoided any talk of recession and continued to insist that the U.S. economy has a “solid foundation.” But he admitted for the first time that the economy is in jeopardy.
“There is a risk of downturn,” Mr. Bush said. “Continued instability in the housing and financial markets could cause additional harm to our overall economy and put our growth and job creation in jeopardy.”
So, you see, there’s urgency, but not a lot of urgency. The economy needs stimulus, according to the President, Congress, and the MSM, but it’ll take a month to decide just what sort of stimulus we need and how much.
Here’s my question: if giving us 800 dollars of our tax money back is such a good thing for the economy, why are we only doing it now and why is it only a one-time thing? It seems to me that the economy would be better stimulated if we just kept that 800 bucks instead of having it taken from us, circulated through the federal bureaucracy (which chips off enormous chunks for itself), then fed back to us. Because, in reality, it’s not 800 dollars that was taken from us. It’s a whole lot more. We’re only getting back 800 dollars. Once you figure in all the handling charges as the money makes its way through the government and back to us you’re looking at probably twice that amount.
So, basically, in order to stimulate an economy that doesn’t necessarily need stimulation right now, the government is going to give us a small part of what it took from us in the first place.
Okay. That makes all kinds of sense.
I have a better plan. How about we cut the federal budget by, oh, a trillion dollars which would still leave two trillion dollars for the government to spend. Let us keep that money (an average of 3,300 dollars per person – not necessarily per taxpayer. The latter number would be a lot higher) to save or spend or donate as we please. I bet it’d go a long way toward keeping our economy piping hot and we’d be able to pay some of our personal debt off, too. Heck, I bet it would forestall some housing problems since there wouldn’t be as many foreclosures.
So, how about it, Mr. President? You want to stimulate the economy and be a conservative, too? Cut spending and let us keep that money.
Category: The Economy and Your Money