DUmmy grasswire Wants Another Check

[GOBUCKS]

grasswire  (1000+ posts)      Sun Oct-30-11 02:04 AM
Original message
why did the gov't stop giving stimulus checks to the public?
Weren't there two of those issued in the Bush years? Were they considered ineffective? Or what? Or did the WH decide that it was better to give money to 1%?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2211868


Nutcase nadin is an expert on fiscal policy:

nadinbrzezinski  (1000+ posts)        Sun Oct-30-11 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. Cause on their own they were very ineffective
Politically they worked like charm.

 

pinboy3niner  (1000+ posts)      Sun Oct-30-11 03:46 AM
Response to Original message
3. Obama did it less than a month after the inauguration
But his stimulus "Making Work Pay" tax cuts were less noticeable because, instead of issuing checks, the cuts were effected by reducing withholding in employer paychecks. IIRC, the cuts resulted in the average worker taking home at least $65 more every month.

FBaggins (1000+ posts)      Sun Oct-30-11 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. You're still getting one.
It's just that it's in the form of a higher take-home check each payday rather than in an annual check.

Well, now, that explains the confusion.  DUmpmonkeys don't work.
DUmmy grasswire just wanders around Milwaukie, Oregon all day, pulling her little red wagon, mumbling about a pie shop.

boston bean  (1000+ posts)        Sun Oct-30-11 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
11. The reason GWB gave them, was so it wouldn't appear as a tax increase
the next year when people didn't get them.

Felt like they were getting some $$ back, and were not to expect it the next year.

It's all political theater.

MrsCorleone (830 posts)      Sun Oct-30-11 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
13. The WH? Hellooooo. Congress has the checkbook, not the President.
What? You cannot honestly believe that Obama can just start writing stimulus checks arbitrarily. The Republicans control the House at the moment. That is where ALL spending bills originate.

Gee whiz. 

You shouldn't be so rougb on grasswire.

She's a special-needs DUmmy.

[franksolich]

You know, the grasswire primitive's over 65, and probably getting social security retirement.

But I wonder what she did during her working life, to contribute to social security.

All I've ever heard her mention was dealing in old junk, buying low and selling high, and it's not like (a) that's a whole lot of money and (b) one's going to report all the income for withholding.

Maybe she worked in a factory, good honest toil, but I doubt it.

[jukin]

When you are a high count impotent poster at the DUmp, you got to post like the interweb's most impotent poster.

[NHSparky]

pinboy3niner  (1000+ posts)      Sun Oct-30-11 03:46 AM
Response to Original message
3. Obama did it less than a month after the inauguration
But his stimulus "Making Work Pay" tax cuts were less noticeable because, instead of issuing checks, the cuts were effected by reducing withholding in employer paychecks. IIRC, the cuts resulted in the average worker taking home at least $65 more every month.

Incorrect again, DUchebags.  When GWB did the stimulus checks in 2001, they were a lump-sum cash payment based on single/married status that didn't change witholding, etc.  When Obama did it, all that was done was lower WITHOLDING.  It didn't lower your tax one ****ing dime.