why that was nice

Should i start using crystal meth?

  • Sure...its not that bad...

    Votes: 93 62.0%
  • Just say no!

    Votes: 57 38.0%

  • Total voters
    150
hey this is still a deal at only 1 billion compared to the $250 billion bush gave away in those "rebate" checks
Correct, it brings about a good possible study about the feedback and effects of focused stimuli vs. broad stimuli.

I would be willing to bet the broad stimuli works better but takes longer, as even those who opt to save will eventually spend the rebate. However, the focused stimulus will indeed make a pop, but if no one believe it is credible, the stimulus doesn't create the intended jolt to get the economy rolling...a good stimulus would rock the economy slowly, but strongly...the same way you'd push a car if it were broke down.

 
we just paid cash for an 06 saturn ion, the wife did the clunker portion by putting her sentra into a rock wall //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/frown.gif.a3531fa0534503350665a1e957861287.gif lol... but we got rid of the car payment and paid cash for her new one... and I hear Lee Auto Group all the time on the radio and tv up here in Maine, they are doing good biz.

 
Correct, it brings about a good possible study about the feedback and effects of focused stimuli vs. broad stimuli.
I would be willing to bet the broad stimuli works better but takes longer, as even those who opt to save will eventually spend the rebate. However, the focused stimulus will indeed make a pop, but if no one believe it is credible, the stimulus doesn't create the intended jolt to get the economy rolling...a good stimulus would rock the economy slowly, but strongly...the same way you'd push a car if it were broke down.
I'm not defending Bush and his idiotic approach to "fixing" the economy and credit system with TARP and rebate checks. Bad idea. About the only bright thing that guy did was cut taxes, and that is what needs to happen now.

Please give provide us with some historical examples in which spending (aka "stimulus") ever fixed an ailing economy. Really, I'd like to know.

 
I'm not defending Bush and his idiotic approach to "fixing" the economy and credit system with TARP and rebate checks. Bad idea. About the only bright thing that guy did was cut taxes, and that is what needs to happen now.
Please give provide us with some historical examples in which spending (aka "stimulus") ever fixed an ailing economy. Really, I'd like to know.
World War 2.

 
You are the original OP, you post some facts. Give me the deficit in relation to the GDP of the United States 1946-1955 in relation to today. You think that running trillion dollar deficits is good? You think printing money and de-valuing the dollar is good? You can only compare something that happened 60+ years ago if you can correlate it. I don't think that you can.

Cutting taxes grows jobs. Spending money we don't have does not. We're closing in on 10%+ unemployment. Weren't we promised that we needed the "stimulus" now? That unemployment wouldn't go over 8.5%? Oh yeah, I forgot, it's all Bush's fault. Talk about me whining, how about the current POTUS?????

 
You are the original OP, you post some facts. Give me the deficit in relation to the GDP of the United States 1946-1955 in relation to today. You think that running trillion dollar deficits is good? You think printing money and de-valuing the dollar is good? You can only compare something that happened 60+ years ago if you can correlate it. I don't think that you can.
Cutting taxes grows jobs. Spending money we don't have does not. We're closing in on 10%+ unemployment. Weren't we promised that we needed the "stimulus" now? That unemployment wouldn't go over 8.5%? Oh yeah, I forgot, it's all Bush's fault. Talk about me whining, how about the current POTUS?????
that's not a fact.

I asked you to post a fact.

 
that's not a fact.
I asked you to post a fact.
Nice try.

Here's a fact:

The New York Times reported recently that the average family in America with an income of $10 million or more received a half-million-dollar tax cut, while the middle class got crumbs (less than $100 shaved off their tax bill). If we examine the taxes paid in a static world—that is, if we assume that there was no change in behavior and economic performance as a result of the tax code—then these numbers are meaningful. Most of the tax cuts went to the super wealthy.

But Americans did respond to the tax cuts. There was more investment, more hiring by businesses, and a stronger stock market. When we compare the taxes paid under the old system with those paid after the Bush tax cuts, the rich are now actually paying a higher proportion of income taxes. The latest IRS data show an increase of more than $100 billion in tax payments from the wealthy by 2005 alone. The number of tax filers who claimed taxable income of more than $1 million increased from approximately 180,000 in 2003 to over 300,000 in 2005. The total taxes paid by these millionaire households rose by about 80 percent in two years, from $132 billion to $236 billion.
Yet the current administration claims that rich aren't paying their "fair share". This during a deep recession where unemployment is closing in on double digits. That is a fact.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

faulkton

5,000+ posts
CarAudio.com Veteran
Thread starter
faulkton
Joined
Location
neverland
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
31,921
Views
600,139
Last reply date
Last reply from
natisfynest
IMG_20260513_214311575.jpg

ThxOne

    May 13, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260513_213956814.jpg

ThxOne

    May 13, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top