Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is more disgraceful - pointing it out or using it as a political tactic?
Being too handicapped to see it as anything but a political tactic. As has now been pointed out for your benefit, the higher velocity of money within low- and moderate-income communities makes them a preferential target for economic stimulus expenditures. That's a fact, and that is all there is to it.
Right you are - Democrat politicians do prey on the stupid or desperate. Sadly, Dumbocrat voters are too stupid to realize it. I guess that's because they're stupid!
I've read all the posts in this thread and guess which one sounded the stupidest.
I am critical of the political strategy of using poor people as a means to an end --- I am cynical of some things - and I do not believe that their reason for this is altruistic - I believe it is a strategy for some to stay in power - period -
That is my point --- that is what can be inferred from the paragraph---low-income families most likely to quickly spend any tax relief they get ---- what will they spend it on that will "Stimulate" the economy? --- groceries? --- that won't "Stimulate" the economy - --- my experience with displaced Katrina folks - was strip clubs, booze, and flat screens ---- that is a sampling of low income folks -
I sincerely hope everyone spends this money on 'strip clubs, booze and flat screens'. I work for a company that manufactures glass, if a few strip clubs got more business, had to expand and build an addition (buy new windows), and if a few more TVs were made and had to purchase glass and coatings for the displays, my business would stop struggling and get back on it's feet. I hope the stimulus money spent on alcohol gives everyone from bartenders to owners of the land the liquor store rents to the people who print labels for Jack Daniels more money. I hope no one saves a dime of this money, because spending it is the point.
Or are you upset because one journalist said lower income families will spend this a little more than those with higher incomes? It doesn't matter if a family making $30k/yr buys a bottle of Jack every week with this money or if a single man buys a $13 starbucks coffee every week, they money go out into businesses.
What exactly do you think the point of a 'stimulus package' is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bornandraised atl
I am critical of the political strategy of using poor people as a means to an end --- I am cynical of some things - and I do not believe that their reason for this is altruistic - I believe it is a strategy for some to stay in power - period -
You are critical of this strategy? Bringing our country out of this mess is more important than accidently hurting someone's feelings. Lincoln used slavery as a means of keeping the country together (do you know he never supported them having the right to vote, or serve in the military?) Would you rather we let a full blown depression come about just so you can feel good about 'standing up for the poor'? Get off your high horse already, I don't like the idea of a stimulus package at all, but right now the only alternative is for our economy to continue in a downward spiral. Would you rather have that?
M1 is already up by 15% and M2 by 10% year-over-year. Those are big numbers. Meanwhile, jobs are created in response to a certain type of signal from the market called increased demand. Wealthy people and businesses do not just go create jobs because they can or like to...they create jobs in order to reap the profit offered by additional sales to accommodate increased demand. Demand drives jobs. Demand is created when people spend a dollar. The lower half of the income scale has real needs all the time. They are far more likely to spend an extra dollar quickly than someone toward the high end of the scale. The faster people spend, the higher the velocity of the money and the more new demand is created. Where possible, you want to skew stimulus dollars away from the well-to-do and better. They're too likely to think it over, or worse yet, to put it in a bank, which brings velocity to a crawl...
Ahhhh. Thank you for an intellegent response, even if I disagree. Yes M1 and M2 is increasing. What we really have is a financial institutional crises - banks aren't lending, investements are collapsing. That's the key to this economic downturn and why cash hungry companies are retrenching, laying off, and thus inhibiting consumer spending.
Until they solve the exact nature of this economic crises, and what caused the problems, nothing will help. The problem wasn't the consumer not spending, that was the result of the problem. You don't fix a problem by addressing the results, you address the cause.
Now I wasn't for the banking (TARP) stimulus either, and that didn't seem to help either. Nor am I for nationalized banking. But Obama needs to find a way to loosen up lending, tighten up some banking regulations and loosen up others.
I am actually for rebates in the form of tax cuts EQUALLY among all levels of the public. As will as steps taken to loosen up credit and promoting the creation of wealth (i.e - - the "the annual produce of the land and labour of the society"). Demand creates jobs, but so does innovation and creation. Investment in new technologies. Retooling for new demand. Capital spending for future product changes.
Now. Obama has stimulus spending for that as well - in areas of infrastructure and clean energy. But here we have the government essentially telling free enterprise where to spend the money. I would rather have free enterprise teling the government where they want to spend the money.
My horse is not very high--- and I really enjoy strip clubs, booze, and flat screens....and I just read that about Lincoln as well...
With that being said ---- do you think the 'poor' are aware they are pawns in this political game? if they are aware... would they care?
I believe something needs to be done and I believe that some of the stimulus is geared toward helping the economy and some is a political game - hence my post
As to what need to be done - no one knows and most of the smartest financial minds on earth have very -very - differing views on what to do....
The demographics do generally prove that low income families are more likely to spend on consumer goods. It's not because they're stupid. It's because when you're subsisting on so little you can't even begin to save for some large investment like a house or a college fund. When life is tenuous at best you have to provide some instant gratification, or some means to view and live vicariously through the celebrity world, especially in this society that worships material accumulation.
So there is always the tv antenna on the roof of the metal roof shack by the levee or the kid with bad teeth listening to the ipod.
I am critical of the political strategy of using poor people as a means to an end --- I am cynical of some things - and I do not believe that their reason for this is altruistic - I believe it is a strategy for some to stay in power - period -
Yes, the question is not what lower income families will be getting ($13 extra a week! Woohoo!) it's what Pelosi, Frank, Reid et al hope to get out of the deal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
