Federal monies.... well, that's a concept, eh?

I'm thinking more in terms of "government cheese".

What I mean is, "vouchers". So like, you know how they're doing the new HDTV thing? If you have one of the old sets and can't afford to convert, you can get a "voucher" from the gov, which is for the specific purpose of getting you a converter box. That forty bucks, or whatever that voucher represents, can't be used for any other purpose. It's not like those cash cards they gave out during Katrina, right?

And I mean, that latter piece there, would be a perfect example, of the economic behavior you can expect from people, when they get free money from the government. If they're not buyin' beer with it, then they're buyin' TV sets, or CD players, or whatever slse. I mean, let's see, the technical vernacular would be "diffusion", correct? A cash stimulus isn't "specific" enough, it's too "diffuse", its effect "diffuses" through the global economy -

But vouchers for, say, gasoline - how about that? That would be a stellar idea, don't you think? 'Cause I mean, "most" of those companies are American, right? We can probably find a way to make the bar codes "not work" at Citgo or whatever, right?

And I mean, that kind of payment, forces people to use the money not only for a specific purpose, but also over a specific time frame - like, you wouldn't go out and blow six hundred bucks of gasoline money "all at once", right? (Or I mean, you "could" find a way to do that, if you were a scammer, but it would be "considerably harder" than with cash, correct? And it would be a lot more work too, and I mean, if there's on thing a scammer doesn't like it's "real work" - which is kinda funny when you consider that most of 'em end up working a lot harder scamming, than they would if they just got a real job to begin with ) - but anyway -

Groceries, would be another good one. Mostly American economy there, correct?

How about.... you see what I'm getting at, right? It's like, how could you keep the "diffusion" to a minimum, so that you have a maximum impact on the American economy, and it doesn't diffuse (much) to places where it isn't wanted (like China, for instance) -

So yeah - the "government cheese" concept, except, I mean, you know, you can still send people the vouchers in the mail so they don't have to wait in line for 'em...

Uh...try cutting all social programs, there should be plenty to of money to use.

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

Roll back the tax cuts,........................ hey it is election time what else?

Like usual, this is stupid. $300-$800 per person won't "stimulate" the economy. It's not enough money to do that. It will just increase the deficit by $300-$800 per person. I'm all for allowing people to keep their own money, so here's a thought. Cut taxes, thereby allowing people to take home a larger paycheck. But when you do it try cutting spending, too. I know, I know. You can't help it.

__________________
Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?

Here's a question to folks like Nonsqtr...

If congress enacted a law that gave "voluntary" tax cuts, where if you felt the government needed your money, you could opt not to receive it, how many people would still be against them? 'Cause if they were, they could choose just not to receive the money.

Yada, yada, yada. Same old mantra coming from you. How about the Dems like Hillary who are ALSO advocating tax rebates? Are they ALL stupid and morons too???

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

It helped to stimulate the economy last time it was done in 2001. But hey, I'm ALL for making the Bush tax cuts permanent....which would also help. While they are at it, they should reverse the Bill Clinton tax on Social Secuity recipients. I'm working on my taxes, and it's pretty pathetic that 85% of my SS benefits are being taxed!! Thanks to Bill Clinton.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

Yes.

No it didn't. The tax cuts did. $300-$800 per person is simply too little money to stimulate a multi-trillion economy. It's literally impossible. You may get stimulation for the one single day it will take for those people to spend the money, then it's right back to what it was before they got the check. It's stupid.

Keep in mind the GOP had 6 whole years to reverse that. Yet oddly, they didn't even SUGGEST it, let alone do it. Shocking to hear, I know. Face it, they aren't any better. You want them to be. You may even need them to be. But they simply aren't.

__________________
Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?

You guys are CHEAP. You sure do get excited over a measely little tax rebate...

$300 bucks? Give me a break. Master throws you some scraps and you rush to lick it off the floor.

The only time anyone should get ready to party is if Ron Paul is elected and the income tax is permanently repealed. THEN you can get ready to PARTY!!!

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

So, in other words: Democrats are going to RAISE taxes. Yes, I agree....even given that opportunity, they most certainly will.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007