Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 08:21:10 AM
Post by: MrRezister on January 24, 2008, 08:30:48 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 08:31:25 AM
So, as usual. Screw the most productive segment of society, reward the unproductive ones who have lots of kids they can't afford.
This mostly benefits the uneducated sorts with eight squalling, dirty-faced future delinquents in tow. As I said in another thread, buy stock in companies that make spinner wheels, I guess.
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 08:39:32 AM
Individual tax payers will get a max of $600, couples a max of $1,200.
I think I'll spend it on hookers and blow.
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 08:39:38 AM
Mtnbkr only has one, and one on the way. Fuzzy math, there?
To be perfectly honest, though, if the idea is to get people spending the money, who is most likely to spend that money?
Someone who makes $100,000+ a year, or the uneducated sort with eight kids in tow?
I know which one I'd bank on.
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 08:41:41 AM
...or the uneducated sort with eight kids in tow?
Can you say Big Screen TV?
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 08:45:55 AM
...or the uneducated sort with eight kids in tow?
Can you say Big Screen TV?
Oh, hell yes. Proper clothes for the kids? BOOKS? Nutritious food? A laptop for them for school? Of course not.
Big screen TV, baby! Or spinner wheels for their ride, tallboys of malt liquor, and Mickey D's for breakfast, lunch and dinner for the whole family for two whole months!
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 08:49:07 AM
"This mostly benefits the uneducated sorts with eight squalling, dirty-faced future delinquents in tow."
Mtnbkr only has one, and one on the way. Fuzzy math, there?
Mtnbkr only has one, and one on the way. Fuzzy math, there?
I'd be willing to bet he can afford to have them, though!
I only object to the people who keep popping out kids and can't even afford one, and demand that the taxpayers step in to help. Kids are great...if you can afford to feed them.
(The Sun paper in the UK today just had a story about a 17-year-old welfare mum who's had two kids by two brothers, both unemployed and on benefits as well. They're definitely beating us in the Jerry Springer level of things...!)
Quote
To be perfectly honest, though, if the idea is to get people spending the money, who is most likely to spend that money?
And yeah, you're right, that sort will blow it on instantly depreciating Chinese consumer goods. It's still a bit depressing though!
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 08:52:45 AM
...or the uneducated sort with eight kids in tow?
Can you say Big Screen TV?
I didn't say what they were going to buy.
Only that they were going to run right out and spend it.
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 09:08:32 AM
...or the uneducated sort with eight kids in tow?
Can you say Big Screen TV?
I didn't say what they were going to buy.
Only that they were going to run right out and spend it.
I know, I made the comment.
Actually I'll probably spend part of mine on a new sleeping bag, my 20 degree bag isn't so 20 degrees anymore. The rest will go towards new tires on my wife's car.
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 09:10:31 AM
Post by: MechAg94 on January 24, 2008, 09:23:53 AM
Post by: cosine on January 24, 2008, 09:27:17 AM
Post by: Finch on January 24, 2008, 09:43:58 AM
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 09:52:08 AM
So what did they have, a dartboard with a bunch of "solutions" on it?
Silly boy.
That's how ALL decisions are made in Washington.
Post by: Finch on January 24, 2008, 10:02:47 AM
So what did they have, a dartboard with a bunch of "solutions" on it?
Silly boy.
That's how ALL decisions are made in Washington.
They way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised. I can't imagine someone sitting there thinking "Hey, this is a great idea."
Post by: HankB on January 24, 2008, 10:28:40 AM
Quote
The rebates would phase out gradually for individuals whose income exceeds $75,000 and couples with incomes above $150,, aides said. Individuals with incomes up to $87,000 and couples up to $174,000 would get partial rebates. The caps rise higher for individuals and couples with children.
So I'll get nothing . . . other than the privilege of paying for this. Which was going to happen anyway, except now I won't get any of my own money back. I really, really, really HATE politicians. <expletive> <expletive> <multiple expletive>
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 10:37:56 AM
Quote
The rebates would phase out gradually for individuals whose income exceeds $75,000 and couples with incomes above $150,, aides said. Individuals with incomes up to $87,000 and couples up to $174,000 would get partial rebates. The caps rise higher for individuals and couples with children.
So I'll get nothing . . . other than the privilege of paying for this. Which was going to happen anyway, except now I won't get any of my own money back. I really, really, really HATE politicians. <expletive> <expletive> <multiple expletive>
I wish I could say that my wife and I make enough money together that we wouldn't be allowed the refund. If we made $150k together we'd be living high on the hog.
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 10:50:58 AM
Quote
The rebates would phase out gradually for individuals whose income exceeds $75,000 and couples with incomes above $150,, aides said. Individuals with incomes up to $87,000 and couples up to $174,000 would get partial rebates. The caps rise higher for individuals and couples with children.
So I'll get nothing . . . other than the privilege of paying for this. Which was going to happen anyway, except now I won't get any of my own money back. I really, really, really HATE politicians. <expletive> <expletive> <multiple expletive>
Shame on you for being successful. You don't get a prize.
Post by: seeker_two on January 24, 2008, 10:53:07 AM
Individual tax payers will get a max of $600, couples a max of $1,200.
I think I'll spend it on hookers and blow.
[Rocky the Flying Squirrel voice] AGAIN?.... [/Rocky the Flying Squirrel voice]
Post by: seeker_two on January 24, 2008, 10:58:23 AM
Quote
The rebates would phase out gradually for individuals whose income exceeds $75,000 and couples with incomes above $150,, aides said. Individuals with incomes up to $87,000 and couples up to $174,000 would get partial rebates. The caps rise higher for individuals and couples with children.
So I'll get nothing . . . other than the privilege of paying for this. Which was going to happen anyway, except now I won't get any of my own money back. I really, really, really HATE politicians. <expletive> <expletive> <multiple expletive>
Wish I had that problem to cuss about.....
I'll probably use mine to pay off debts I was dumb enough to accumulate in my not-so-innocent youth and with current medical costs. Sooner I get that paid off, the sooner I'll join in the spending spree and start stockpiling mil-surps.....
Post by: MrRezister on January 24, 2008, 11:00:51 AM
So I'll get nothing . . . other than the privilege of paying for this. Which was going to happen anyway, except now I won't get any of my own money back.
Maybe you should quit your job and cash in! Don't forget the party line : "From Each according to his Ability!"
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 11:07:39 AM
Waah waah waah...
Sucks when your bag of gold is too heavy, doesn't it?
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 11:27:00 AM
"So I'll get nothing . . ."
Waah waah waah...
Sucks when your bag of gold is too heavy, doesn't it?
Waah waah waah...
Sucks when your bag of gold is too heavy, doesn't it?
$75k in some areas of the country is living high, in other areas, barely squeaking by! And in places where it'd be living high, the jobs don't pay that. In places where it's barely squeaking by, they do.
Post by: El Tejon on January 24, 2008, 11:33:29 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on January 24, 2008, 11:35:57 AM
$75k in some areas of the country is living high, in other areas, barely squeaking by! And in places where it'd be living high, the jobs don't pay that. In places where it's barely squeaking by, they do.
Yup. A better solution would be to base it on the average of a given area. Below or at average, you get a refund, above, no refund (if they still want to punish "rich" people).
Because wifey is a stay at home mommy, we'll get our "refund" based on household income. If I were single, I would get dick. We'll probably blow much of it on a new TV, a purchase we were planning on making some time this Spring anyway. Our current TV is dying.
Chris
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 11:37:27 AM
I thought you uh... ah... I'd better leave that one alone...
Your TV isn't dying. You just have to clean Abby's accumulated fingerprints and food off the screen every so often. You'll be shocked at how much brighter the picture is.
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2008, 11:37:33 AM
Quote from: charby
I think I'll spend it on hookers and blow.
did you work for Airborne Express ?? We had a supervisor go to training in Dayton/Wilmington, OH. Got his two weeks of per diem (either $300 or $600) and spent it all the first night on, you guessed it hookers and blow.
Needless to say he had a very short career with the company.
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 11:39:16 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 11:43:14 AM
So did he get one $600 hooker, or two $300 hookers?
You need a million dollars to get two at the same time.
/obligatory ref
Post by: mtnbkr on January 24, 2008, 11:45:01 AM
Your TV isn't dying. You just have to clean Abby's accumulated fingerprints and food off the screen every so often. You'll be shocked at how much brighter the picture is.
The picture is fine, the stupid thing likes to shut itself off if it hasn't warmed up yet. Once it's warm, it works fine, until we shut it off for more than a couple hours. It is happening more frequently as time goes on.
Chris
Post by: Rocketman56 on January 24, 2008, 11:45:50 AM
Steve
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2008, 11:54:07 AM
Quote
So did he get one $600 hooker, or two $300 hookers?
I think he got a couple of "budget" hookers (come on, we're talking Dayton, OHIO) and spent the rest on blow. We never got a chance to see how he broke it down on his expense report.......
and whether he attached his receipts.
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 11:57:20 AM
Quote
So did he get one $600 hooker, or two $300 hookers?
I think he got a couple of "budget" hookers and spent the rest on blow. We never got a chance to see how he broke it down on his expense report.......
and whether he attached his receipts. Could $600 even get you a decent hooker? I have no clue what it costs and I'm not sure what cocaine costs either.
Something tells me $600 will cause me to catch something that can't be cured with penicillian and the blow will be mostly Draino.
-C
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2008, 11:59:43 AM
Quote
Individuals who pay income taxes would get up to $600, working couples $1,200 and those with children an additional $300 per child under the agreement. Workers who make at least $3,000 but don't pay taxes would get $300 rebates
Quote
The rebates would phase out gradually for individuals whose income exceeds $75,000 and couples with incomes above $150,, aides said. Individuals with incomes up to $87,000 and couples up to $174,000 would get partial rebates. The caps are higher for those with children.
So if I read this right. We'll get $1,800. $1,200 because we're a working couple making under $150,000 per year (combined) and we've got two crumb crunchers good for another $600.
"Good news kids !!! We won't have to sell you off for medical experiments after all !!!"
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2008, 12:04:52 PM
Quote
Could $600 even get you a decent hooker?
Define "decent hooker".
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 12:23:58 PM
Quote
Could $600 even get you a decent hooker?
Define "decent hooker".
I saw some really hot ones in Amsterdam. I didn't partake in the action so I have no clue what it would have cost.
Post by: Rocketman56 on January 24, 2008, 12:25:15 PM
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable?
??Steve
Post by: mtnbkr on January 24, 2008, 12:28:15 PM
Hmm, I haven't seen it mentioned in the article, but I'm assuming they are going to use the IRS data base for dependent information and earnings..
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable???
Steve
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable?
??Steve
How else would they do it?
Chris
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 12:29:02 PM
Something about the IRS being busy with 2007 returns right now.
Post by: charby on January 24, 2008, 12:30:07 PM
Hmm, I haven't seen it mentioned in the article, but I'm assuming they are going to use the IRS data base for dependent information and earnings..
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable???
Steve
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable?
??Steve
That is what they did for the $300 checks back in '01.
Post by: zahc on January 24, 2008, 01:46:59 PM
Quote
So what did they have, a dartboard with a bunch of "solutions" on it?
no, they have a jump to conclusions mat.
Post by: GigaBuist on January 24, 2008, 02:52:57 PM
"So I'll get nothing . . ."
Waah waah waah...
Sucks when your bag of gold is too heavy, doesn't it?
Waah waah waah...
Sucks when your bag of gold is too heavy, doesn't it?
Sucks that some heel that made $3k that year and paid no income tax will get $600 while the guy that dumped $23,000 into the federal government's pockets gets a nice kick to the balls for his effort.
Post by: MillCreek on January 24, 2008, 02:59:47 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on January 24, 2008, 03:35:25 PM
Hmm, I haven't seen it mentioned in the article, but I'm assuming they are going to use the IRS data base for dependent information and earnings..
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable???
Steve
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable?
??Steve
Pst. The IRS knows how much money you make.
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2008, 07:33:10 PM
Hmm, I haven't seen it mentioned in the article, but I'm assuming they are going to use the IRS data base for dependent information and earnings..
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable???
Steve
Does this not make anyone feel uncomfortable?
??Steve
Dude, it's a TAX rebate.
Who the heck do you think is going to have the information to send out TAX rebates? National Endowment for the Arts?
Post by: Tecumseh on January 24, 2008, 11:49:58 PM
"This mostly benefits the uneducated sorts with eight squalling, dirty-faced future delinquents in tow."
Mtnbkr only has one, and one on the way. Fuzzy math, there?
Mtnbkr only has one, and one on the way. Fuzzy math, there?
I'd be willing to bet he can afford to have them, though!
I only object to the people who keep popping out kids and can't even afford one, and demand that the taxpayers step in to help. Post by: HankB on January 25, 2008, 02:02:15 AM
Dude, it's a TAX rebate.
No - the dictionary defines rebate as "a return of a part of a payment." How the heck does a "rebate" go to someone who DIDN'T PAY ANY INCOME TAX? It's a GIFT - as usual, .gov is robbing Peter to pay Paul . . . for Paul's vote.
Sucks that some heel that made $3k that year and paid no income tax will get $600 while the guy that dumped $23,000 into the federal government's pockets gets a nice kick to the balls for his effort.
Amen to that, brother.
Post by: Waitone on January 25, 2008, 02:20:05 AM
More interest paid to foreign companies and countries.
More money distributed to the non-productive elements of society.
More burden placed on the back of future generations.
More goobermint interference in the market designed to keep the market from correcting.
More of pushing the day of reckoning into the future.
More . . . . .
More . . . . . .
What is it they say about insanity. Doing the same thing over and over yet expecting a different result?
Post by: James Fitzer on January 25, 2008, 05:43:11 AM
Or perhaps a new guitar...
www.carvin.com
That SH575 is lookin reall purdy!
Post by: K Frame on January 25, 2008, 06:01:50 AM
Your government at work.
The pertinent information remains that this money is coming out of the Treasury.
Who in the government has the information on those in the nation who are of working age?
Come on, the answer's not difficult...
Uh... uh....
NASA!
Post by: Ben on January 25, 2008, 07:00:20 AM
Quote
$75k in some areas of the country is living high, in other areas, barely squeaking by!
Yup, around here $75K is, "living with roommates" salary.
Well, I get zip, but at least they didn't make me pay anything. Oh wait......
This cart I'm pulling is getting heavier and heavier.
Post by: roo_ster on January 25, 2008, 07:24:40 AM
Individual tax payers will get a max of $600, couples a max of $1,200.
I think I'll spend it on hookers and blow.
And you'll likely squander the rest
"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."
----George Best
Post by: Northwoods on January 26, 2008, 07:23:26 AM
Assuming we get the full $1800 (we have 2 sprogs) I think we'll probably use it to pay for some needed things we've been deferring for some time. We haven't bought clothes in a couple years except for the kids, and they're close to outgrowing most of what they've got. My wife wants more makeup (personally I think she looks better without it, but oh well). And, if we don't already have the emergency fund back up to $25k by then (it's around $24.2k now, so it should be back up really soon) we'll probably put the remainder into our sinking funds for pet care, doctor's visits, Christmas gifts, etc. That or maybe put it into the kids' 529's.