Comments on: Charlie Wilson Wants Seniors Included In Stimulus Package

By: Randy

Randy — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:32:41 +0000

Actually, I might agree to that. Depending on how it would be implemented.

I heard more details of the “rebate” program. It’s actually more like a cash advance. Any money you get in 2008 will be deducted from your 2009 refund. And if you don’t get a 2009 refund, you’ll be forced to send money back to the IRS.

So, this is very directed short term borrowing. Bad all around.

By: David

David — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 19:08:17 +0000

I don’t really see this program helping much either. I might be a bit naive on this, but I’ve been think that the best think to do would be increase government spending on things like improving roads and bridges in the vein of the WPA-like programs of the Great Depression era. That way we’d be killing two birds with one stone. We’d be putting money in workers pockets and repairing the national infrastructure.

By: Randy

Randy — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 13:00:25 +0000

I’m glad to see that the press has stopped calling this a “rebate”. I’ve been arguing that it isn’t a rebate, it has no relevance on how much money each individual has sent in. The changes described would send checks to people who never sent any money in the first place.

I’ve heard two radio commenters who shared my opinion. Clark Howard (financial radio program) calls it a “gift certificate” and Dave Ramesy (Christian financial radio program) says it’s not a rebate, it”s just bait.

I’m firmly against the program in ANY form. Anything that expands it, only makes it worse.

For the record, I probably won’t receive this stimulus, if I do (I haven’t read the Senate plan) I would probably save it, not spend it. I have a mother and mother-in-law would receive nothing under the House package, probably something under the Senate package. Four children who would receive the package, one with a child who would get the “extra” children’s package.