So they passed a "stimulus" package


Maybe I don’t understand economics, but the current administration’s economic stimulus package does not make one ounce of sense to me. Where does this money come from anyway? They are going to take money they do not have (check out the deficit: The Debt Clock, US Current Account Deficit, and Is the US Current Account Deficit Sustainable?) and give it to citizens (and those who don’t pay taxes) in the hopes that we will squander it on things we don’t need (“big ticket items”) in order to stimulate the economy. They want me to take that $1200 check and buy a car? Are they crazy? What they’re saying is that they want me to go further into debt because my debt stimulates the economy and helps them feel better about their debt.

No thank you.

This isn’t even a decent band-aid for our problem.

One thing is certain: the government is taxing us to death. And they know it! That’s why they repeatedly “stimulate” the economy by giving our money back to us!

Ron Paul has drafted a Comprehensive Economic Revitalization Plan. I have no idea if it’s a good plan or not. For all I know it could totally crash our based-on-air economy. But when I repeatedly see the words “Eliminate taxes on…,” I like it.

8 Comments on “So they passed a "stimulus" package

  1. These nonsensical economics are ideas from the late economist John Maynard Keynes.Keynesian economics believe that the economy works best when the state intervenes. Whenever you hear about “stimulating the economy”, you’re hearing the echo of Keynes.For the government to stimulate the economy requires the power of the economy to be centralized in the government. Can you say “totalitarian abuse”? Good, I thought you could.Keynes actually admitted that his economic plan works better in a socialist or fascist society. Yippee.Those little government stimulations become permanent policies and programs and eventually choke the life out of the private sector.There are a lot of good resources at the Ludwig von Mises Institute (http://www.mises.org)A great starting point is Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt. (http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-50th-Anniversary/dp/0930073193/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201268556&sr=8-2)

    Like

  2. I’m one of the first that says that the government should be collecting less– I think that we shouldn’t have full time senators/congressmen! I’m also one of the first in line for the government giving my money back. I applauded the $300 that Bush sent back that first year he did it.But this time around it has a different feel to it. For one thing, this isn’t a tax rebate, it’s a subsidy. For another, it goes to everyone, and not just tax payers. Lastly, it bears the language of government ownership of the money (ALA Brian/Keynes) instead of the idea that we own the money.Lastly, I really like what you had to say, Leslie, about the whole “let’s get into more debt!” It’s wrong headed, and can only make things worse. What are they going to do when all these people they stimulus-ed into buying their new cars can’t afford anything more because they’re sending their entire paycheck to creditors?Perhaps they should just send these rebates to the credit companies and tell them to take some off of everyone’s debt, and then close those companies…

    Like

  3. Here are some good links by CNBC financial commentator and economist Donald Luskin, who endorsed Ron Paul and his economic plan on January 22 and as of yesterday is Economic Advisor to the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign.http://www.poorandstupid.com/2008_01_20_chronArchive.asp#4891960430940603147http://www.poorandstupid.com/2008_01_20_chronArchive.asp#8360894592462072506I'd be happy to live through a stock market crash right now if it would wake people up and make them elect Ron Paul. Because it’s just going to keep getting worse if they don’t.

    Like

  4. Oh man, Leslie! I know so little on this stuff! : ( I’m thankful for the links Brian posted too! These topics feel really overwhelming to me!And how do we apply Romans 13? I’m not saying anything against what you said! 🙂 Just curious. Like I said, I know nothing, and it’s overwhelming to me…so just a real question! : )

    Like

  5. It is little more than a morale raiser. And the way I understand it, it is a tax rebate you will get EARLY that you’ll take as a credit on your 2008 return in 2009. So it isn’t free money. There is no such thing as a free lunch.Now, when and if I get a refund, I’ll cash that check and it will go to the debt payoff or to our house fund. I won’t be buying a big screen.I was listening to NPR today and they had a great analogy. The middle class and lower class are the LAST people who need to go out and spend money. We’re the ones drowning in debt to start with. Sending us money and telling us to spend it is like asking a beatup, banged up athlete to go into the game and score a winning goal.I don’t like either side on this. If we left it up to the dems, there would be no rebate but those people who don’t or hardly pay taxes would be getting extended benefits and programs/services.This country is built by the middle class. It has been carried by us for a long time. We cannot continue drowing in debt and not increasing our income. We need to as a nation learn to work with a BALANCED budget, both on a federal level and in our personal homes.

    Like

  6. Shawnda, honestly that never even crossed my mind. I assume you’re talking about the part regarding submitting to governing authorities. Is that right?

    Like

%d bloggers like this: