42 Comments

• 1. neocon  |  January 18th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

  It will be interesting to see if the Dems support this rebate but still oppose the tax “rate” cuts. Afterall, the tax “rate” cuts are just another way of putting money back in peoples pockets, right? Except for those that don’t actually pay income taxes.

• 2. Reg Dwight  |  January 18th, 2008 at 1:50 pm

  $800? Thats the plan? Now?

  How does the cliche go? “Too little, too late.”

  After years and years of saying everything is great with the economy (I mean really, look at the silliness you even find on this site about “What recession?” and “The Bush Economy is Great” whatever) ignoring the economic imbalances that threw thousands of people out of their own homes and jobs, Bush now offers this crap.

  It will not work.

• 3. Diana Powe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

  “What recession?” asks Blogs For Victo(r)y rhetorically six days ago, adding (my emphasis added), “It amazes that despite so much positive things going on in our economy [sic], Democrats have constantly talked it down, even go so far as to say that the economy is recession.” Now, it’s oddly of no particular moment that the President wants to issue a tax rebate to combat what he tiptoes around saying is dramatically bad economic news. Why does he tiptoe around the reality? That’s what presidents must do because to say what many economists are already saying - that the United States may already be in a recession - would be bad politics. However, politics doesn’t keep anyone warm.

• 4. neocon  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

  Diana & Reg White,

  Please look up the widely accepted definition of a recession to realize that you both don’t know what you’re talking about. Even Bernanke stated that the economy is not in a recession and that these measure are being pro-active so the economy does not enter into a recession.

  The economy has been very good over the last several years and it is will always be, and always has been cyclical (kind of like the weather). 52 consecutive quarters of GDP growth (hint, you’ll find your recession answer here).

• 5. Diana Powe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:06 pm

  neocon,

  We’ve been through the recession discussion before. Recessions are never definitively identified until after they’ve been in place long enough for the data to be examined. So, that’s why many economists are looking at all the bad news and saying that the U. S. economy may be in recession. It may be or it may not be. However, the President is also seeing the bad news and is worried about it, hence, this tax rebate idea.

• 6. Retired Spook  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:09 pm

  The 40″ Samsung LCD-HD flat screen TV that I’ve had my eye on keeps coming down in price. Six months ago it was $1,699. Currently HHGregg has it on sale for $1,039. And the goverment is going to pay for 80% of it — COOL!

  Just doin’ my part to stimulate the economy, heh.

• 7. Joe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:12 pm

  neocon,
  That was some kind of spin. We are either in a recession or we are perilously close to a recession. Either way, that is what this rebate is trying to get us out of/keep us away from.

  I think what people are saying is that people all across the country have been hurting for some time. Yet people on this site were stating how fantastic the economy really is and all the “doom and gloomers” aka Democrats are just suffering from BDS.
  Now the Prez says he is worried about a recession and is offering this. So now, falling in lock-step, you people say this is the right thing to do.

  So which is it. Is the economy just cruising along beautifully or is the economy struggling to keep out/get out of a recession?

• 8. Joe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

  That is correct Spook. And think of how many other people feel the same way?
  So as more and more people buy things with this rebate, then perhaps more jobs will get created. That, in turn, should create more people with more money to spend.
  Or those that can already afford that big screen tv get the rebate and they just put it into the bank and nothing gets better.

• 9. Doug  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:17 pm

  Tax rebates….. I don’t know, there are more funadmental problems. The price of gas over the last year is up enough to cover $800. If interest rates were slashed even by just 100 points, that could save the average homeowner/credit card holder a couple thousand dollars a year.

  Bernanke was clenching his teeth when he spoke yesterday about giving the tax rebate to the lower middle class will mean getting that money into the economy faster - you could just see him clench at the though of where that money was going to go - into lower multiplier items (hence a short-term 2-month effect rather than a longer 8-month effect).

  Granted, that pretty much takes away Obama’s and Clinton’s plan to overtly by votes come November, I don’t see it doing much more than a three month fix. Maybe Bernanke sees some sort of inflation on the rise in a few months and he only wants a very short-term fix, I don’t know.

• 10. Doug  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:21 pm

  As for all the “recession” - sayers, I’ve seen the pundits cry out, ‘we’re in a recession’ - We are obviously NOT in a recession, since by it’s definition a recession has to be two full quarters of NEGATIVE GDP growth. The economy maybe SLOWING DOWN - but that could just mean we are GROWING less quickly - and that is not the definition of a recession - unless you are a Democrat looking for votes.

• 11. Reg Dwight  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

  Neocon:

  Then ask Bush why this stimulus plan is needed? Who destroyed up our economy? Cycles? More like begging the Chinese to fund our Iraq war while bowing on bended knee to the House of Saud to lower oil prices.

  BTW, this $145 Billion is about the same figure as annual Iraq supplemental funding. Face facts BushBackers, credibility and accountability are words that never pass the President’s lipos. Not two weeks ago Bush reported the economy was in good shape. Here are two words that scare the hell out of me:

  BUSH and PLAN

  Lets just hope that Rumsfailed and Heckava Job Brownie had nothing to do with its creation.

  Warrior/Decider Bush is the American Nero.

  Now, feel free to place here some totally irrelevant quip about a blue dress and Clinton.

• 12. Doug  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

  2nd Quarter 2007 GDP growth - 3.8%
  3rd Quarter 2007 GDP growth - 4.9%
  4th Quarter 2007?

  Obviously the economy has been burning up with the magnificent Bush Tax cuts - just amazing brilliance from his guys, recession - no, targeted segments of the economy may be in recession, but not the economy as a whole. It still just amazes me how we’ve had such huge growth without huge across the board inflation problems. When you take into consideration the energy sector price increases (that are externally driven) it’s even more amazing.

• 13. Sunny  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:34 pm

  IF - just IF we go into a recession, will it be George Bush’s fault? I know Bill Clintion was blamed for the one at the end of his presidency, so just wondering if the same will be true of Bush IF there is a recession before he leaves office?

• 14. anarchist  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

  “Hellicopter” Ben to the rescue!!

  Yay, we’ve returned back to Keynesian economics. Recessions are caused by some kind of tendency for the free market to over supply itself or something, and have nothing to do with credit expansion and contraction and the industries effected by that. The solution is more consumption money, not solid savings-investment in productive enterprise.

  Wasn’t this what Jimmy Carter did? It worked out awesome for him.

  BTW, wasn’t there a post the other day calling Obama’s tax rebate plan a vote buying gimmick?

• 15. Diana Powe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:48 pm

  Sunny,

  Please. Don’t be naive. Nothing is ever President Bush’s fault. Haven’t you gotten the message yet? It will be President Clinton’s fault.

• 16. Diana Powe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 2:53 pm

  And when I say President Clinton, I mean, of course, the president who left office 2,554 days ago but whose malign influence still shadows us all. I predict things will stop being his fault circa the year 5001. That should be long enough.

• 17. Retired Spook  |  January 18th, 2008 at 3:49 pm

  HDMI inputs galore. 1080P
  all for <$1000!
  I went down to BB to look at it…it is sweet.

  Brett, I suspect the reason they’re dropping so fast is that word is getting out that anyone who has cable or satellite isn’t going to have to buy a special analog/digital converter early next year when all broadcasts switch to digital. The demand that manufacturers anticipated as we get closer to that date just isn’t happening, so VOILA! — down come the prices.

  The unit you linked to looks nice. We recently switched from Direct TV to Dish Network, and the Dish Tech told me that Samsung makes one of the best LCD units on the market. That’s the only reason I’ve been looking at the Samsung. We’ve always owned Sony’s going back to the late 70’s, but their LCD’s and Plasmas are quite a bit higher priced.

  Diana, face it. A guy who sodomized an intern with a cigar in the Oval Office while foreign dignitaries waited in the Rose Garden is just so easy to demonize. I suspect most thinking people, regardless of philosophy or political persuasion, know Clinton didn’t cause the tech bubble to burst.

• 18. Sunny  |  January 18th, 2008 at 3:56 pm

  Diana,
  I do understand that the Republicans will blame everything possible on Bill Clinton for as long as they can. What is going to be interesting is if a Democrat is elected president in 2008 and continues with the Bush policies i.e. using executive privilege whenever it is convenient; signing statements basically undoing what Congress just did and Bush just signed into law; of diminishing the roles of the Legislative and Judicial branch; using the AG as his private attorney - you know, these kinds of things - maybe even another pre-emptive war, - just wondering if the Republicans will think the president should have that much power. If only Bush could have gotten a blow job and could have been impeached!!!

• 19. Diana Powe  |  January 18th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

  Retired Spook,

  The former President’s extremely tawdry sexual behavior gets no defense from me. I also don’t excuse his lying about it, although, it was wildly inane for the GOP to try to remove him from office over it. However, thanks for the rational note.

• 20. djp  |  January 18th, 2008 at 4:26 pm

  Recession coming? What is that you guys always say around here: “I blame the tax cuts”

• 21. keefer  |  January 18th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

  IF - just IF we go into a recession, will it be George Bush’s fault? I know Bill Clintion was blamed for the one at the end of his presidency, so just wondering if the same will be true of Bush IF there is a recession before he leaves office?

  Of course he will, Sunni–that’s the way politics works.

  As for your talking-point accusations in your later post, if Bush is sooooo guilty of wrongdoing, then why is he still in office and not sitting in a federal prison?

  Diana, as for your “5001″ statement about Slick, I venture to bet that Bush will be blamed for a lot during the next 20 years or so. Hop on over to any lefty blog, and you’ll see Bush getting blamed for everything. That’s the way it works on these blogs, ya know?

• 22. keefer  |  January 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

  Oops, I forgot…cows…

• 23. Eric T  |  January 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

  Praise the Lord, best news I ever heard.

  RED dwight and Diane- you don’t sound impressed. I’ll put my address on and you can forward that check my way, if you feel its too little too late.

• 24. keefer  |  January 18th, 2008 at 4:32 pm

  I’m all for it… but we still need to make Bush’s earlier tax cuts permanent.

  Never gonna happen, Matt; the Donkaroaches need all our money to bribe the less fortunate and dumbed-down…

• 25. Reg Dwight  |  January 18th, 2008 at 5:31 pm

  Eric T:

  Why would I send you my check? It is too little too late. Wall Street has already come to conclusion this is a waste of time.

  Go ahead and post your address if you want. I am not impressed because of exactly what I’ve seen posted here. Ya got Spook and Brett blowing their wad on a Chi-Com built flat screen and thinking that will create jobs in America!!! It laughable.

  You don’t get it, do you?

  The Chi-Coms are bankrolling our debt, the shortfall generated by this tax rebate will be financed by the Chi-Coms financing our debt.

  Then you have Spook and Brett sending their money right back to China thinking they’ve made jobs in America (well I do supposed some chubby pimple face kid at Best Buy will be able to retain his $9.19/hour no benefits McJob for a few more months while they sell these LCDs).

  If you want to make a difference with your money, send it to the Army so they can buy a few hours of social work time for these soldiers coming back so messed up in the head or hire a janitorial crew to scrub the mold and rat crap of the floors at Walter Reed.

• 26. Tractatus  |  January 18th, 2008 at 5:38 pm

  “What recession?” asks Blogs For Victo(r)y rhetorically six days ago

  Yes, Diana, but the fact that we need a stimulus package to give the awesome, awesome Bush economy a jolt, offset the damage of the Bush tax cuts, and hopefully blunt the recession is proof that the awesome, awesome Bush economy is super-strong thanks to those tax cuts that Bernanke says should not be made permanent, lest they be so successful that we need to give the economy another jolt (which would be further proof that the tax cuts are working, of course).

  Also, Bush’s $800 tax rebate is a brilliant idea, but Obama’s proposed $250 tax credit is just a cynical trick to buy support.

  Indeed, these hypocrisies are central to B4V’s point.

• 27. TiredofLibBullShit  |  January 18th, 2008 at 6:20 pm

  I see Diana is trying to blame the recession at the end of the Clinton administration on the Republican Congress.

  Wow, Diana was Clinton a leader at anything?

  Wait, what am I thinking, everything positive in the 90s was Clinton’s doing, everything negative was the fault of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!

  Okay Diana deflect away.

• 28. Reg Dwight  |  January 18th, 2008 at 6:36 pm

  That rabidly liberal mag, Business Week, says the “Clinton Recession” is an invention of Warrior/Decider Bush.

  Now you can deflect away.

  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm

• 29. 1moreyear  |  January 18th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

  Spook old friend,

  I see you’re still very bulllish on the economy. I will admit that,while I saw all this coming, it certainly unfolded much slower than I would have thought. Still, I sat out 2007 in MM then TIPS and managed to beat the indices by a pretty good margin, with ZERO risk. Actually positioned nicely for the next phase. I do indeed remember all the laughing and jeering I received here about the wall street fraud and what it would do to us. So I say to you all here on the new and improved “blogs for those who think they know what they’re talking about but fail to recognize that there is in fact a reality outside their bubble, ” Cheers and many happy returns in the new year.

  Remember, buy-buy-buy, that’s “the secret” key to happiness and salvation.

  P.S. this enter the word validation really sucks, just an opinion. I’m sure you’ll find something to disagree with there. Also, Diana, thank you for keeping up the good fight. Most of us have frankly tired of talking with fools. They won’t learn.

• 30. Thrower  |  January 18th, 2008 at 6:40 pm

  That notable lib Jim Cramer said the economy went into recession in December. He further predicted that when mortgage insurers start dropping like dominoes as foreclosures accelerate, the DOW will lose 2,000 points. He is now a bear.

  I see nothing coming out of candidates from either party that recognizes the depth of this crisis. I’m sure many people (and some of those on this blog) are doing great. But if you know anyone who is hounded by creditors, is trying to sell a home, or buried in credit card debt, or enriching the leeches who deal in payday loans, you might have a sense of the angst felt by tens of millions of Americans.

  If Democrats can speak to the economic anxiety now commonplace among Americans while Republicans continue to blather on about making permanent tax cuts that were tangibly felt by few people, 2008 is going to be a bloodbath for the grand old party.

• 31. plainjane  |  January 18th, 2008 at 7:08 pm

  ….And the goverment is going to pay for 80% of it — COOL!Retired Spook | January 18th, 2008 at 2:09 pm

  Well actually your children’s children. I will say the Bush administration is making progress. This time when they borrow the 120 billion or so from China to pay for the tax rebates(Ha,Ha) they will be giving the money to Americans instead of Iraqis. But I would say, put people to work with the money. For God sake fix a bridge, levy or something.

• 32. Eric T  |  January 18th, 2008 at 7:52 pm

  Reg Dwight

  #27 does address the real problem, the good paying jobs have been outsourced in large numbers.
  The Clinton/ NAFTA and grow Walmart with cheap imports from China. Is a great reason not to vote Clinton. Here in Detroit where thousands and thousands of good jobs that people could have a decent life with, were outsourced by good ol Bill Clinton NAFTA. she wouldn’t even come to the state to campaign. We remember that stuff here, they may try to rewrite history. But that is at the core of the problem. People can’t pump money into the economy when thousands and thousands of the good paying jobs get sent away. Whether it is the dems or GOP this time around, the American Economy and Jobs need to be a priority. Huckabee and Mitt were the only two that came to Detroit and offered ideas and hope. McCain offered status quo and said those jobs are gone and not coming back. I’m praying Mike Huckabee wins in South Carolina so he can stay in the race a while. The dems had no ideas or answers, too busy on Oprah to come up and talk to the people in the state with the worst unemployment, foreclosures, and offer some ideas.

  I’m glad Bush sees the people at the bottom struggling and wants to help, I’m about ready to walk away from the house, credit card debt and file bankrupcy, The check couldn’t have come at a better time. It is perfect timing and really will help out. My hours have been drastically cut. I’m grateful for the help.

• 33. 1moreyear  |  January 18th, 2008 at 8:00 pm

  Eric, keep on having faith bro. Just don’t remember that Bush and the GOP congress passed that danged new bankruptcy bill so guess what? You can’t file and walk away. You owe it all, they will follow you and take your wages. Praise Bush for all he does for America. Oh, and please vote for the Huckster, we want your vote to “really, really” count.

• 34. Reg Dwight  |  January 18th, 2008 at 9:27 pm

  Eric:

  Clinton/NAFTA?

  Open up a history book friend. NAFTA, like much in America is a bi-partisan disaster. Dropping it at Clinton’s feet is dishonest.

  US, Canada and Mexico signed NAFTA in December 1992 (guess who was President, it wasn’t Clinton and it wasn’t a Dem), subject to ratification by the legislatures of the three countries.

  Now it is true Clinton made NAFTA’s passage a major legislative priority in 1993. But how did the votes go:

  House Voting For NAFTA:

  132 Republicans
  102 Democrats

  House Voting Against NAFTA:

  156 Democrats
  43 Republicans
  1 independent against

  Now even a Republican like you can see that more Dems were against NAFTA than were for it and they even bucked Clinton to vote against it. GOP members were bigger supporters of NAFTA than Dems.

  Senate Voting For NAFTA:

  34 Republicans
  27 Democrats

  Senate Voting Against NAFTA:

  28 Democrats
  10 Republicans against
  1 Democrat opponent not voting

  Again, more Dems were against NAFTA than were for it.

  It really sucks when the facts show you don’t know what you are talking about.

  In summary:

  NAFTA was signed when a GOP President was in office.

  NAFTA had most of its support in the House and Senate from GOP members.

  Clinton was a strong supporter of NAFTA, but most of his party in Congress did not back him.

  Clinton/NAFTA? Try GOP/NAFTA.

  Then again don’t let facts stop you from bashing Clinton.

• 35. Thrower  |  January 18th, 2008 at 9:36 pm

  Sad to hear of your distress Eric. I see many like you, including a longterm Republican friend whose pension vanished in a corporate bankruptcy (the execs were taken care of however). The candidate that puts Americans like you at the head of his agenda gets my vote (unless named Hillary).

  I don’t doubt Bush feels your pain but his proposal is a move to head off a political catastrophe for his party. Be wary of GOP candidates who reach for your vote, but promise to make the Bush tax cuts permanent in the next breath. I’m not off of supply side economics yet, but seeding the clouds did not produce water for everyone. Next time money needs to go to people who need and will spend it here. I am confident the wealth will trickle up.

• 36. AgentFear  |  January 18th, 2008 at 9:48 pm

  You’re a bunch of horse’s asses if you think a measly 800 bucks is going to solve/help the coming economic meltdown.

  As usual you live in some fantasy world where Bush is king and savior.

  Let’s see, food and fuel are NOT included in the inflationary indications? Whaaaaa? See I’m a guessing they play a BIG part in equation.

  “The government does not HAVE that $800 per person sitting around. Once again, they are going to the Federal Reserve to BORROW the money, which means that somewhere down the road, they plan on taking it all back again with interest. It’s just another way of sinking the debt-hook just that much deeper into your flesh. (Back in 2004, Bush gave out a “Rebate” of $200 per taxpayer, but it turned out to be a loan as the $200 was added to the following year’s tax bills.)”

  Traitors. All of you. Buy your freakin’ big screen.
  You got yours. Sh*t on everybody else.

  Typical .

• 37. Matt Margolis  |  January 18th, 2008 at 10:48 pm

  Diana, in response to your comment (#3) you seem to forget that in my post I made a clear distinction between claiming that we are in a recession right now and debating the economic outlook of the country.

  Second, just because we are not in a recession now doesn’t mean a) economic stimulus isn’t necessary to keep our economy going strong and b) that we don’t deserve more of our money back anyway.

• 38. Eric T  |  January 19th, 2008 at 11:28 am

  Red dwight-

  Thanks for the vote tally.
  It does show Clinton was a Nafta/man. And it shows most dems were against it, A good reason not to vote Clinton, the unions and any democrats that believed that Clinton was there looking out for the American people or good wages were let down. And the results of years of outsourcing jobs are in your post in #27. Clinton= more NAFTA. The dems try to paint Bill as hero of the working class. Far from true. post #36 confirms Bill goes Against most dems, to cater to the Big Corporations and actually destroy jobs with good wages. What a guy.

• 39. Nate  |  January 19th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

  and think about the hundreds of billions of dollars unnecessarily spent in Iraq.

  what will $800 do? it’s not a single mortgage payment. it could cover the gas price increase for a few months of vehicle fuel–but with home heating increases, food increases, etc. it’s probably more likely it will help for a month or two.

  however, in our culture of buy everything it will probably go towards buying something not so needed in a lot of cases.

  and why not target those most in need? do millionaires need $800? what would the top income or net worth be that would truly benefit from $800? why not cut that off and make it bigger for those who could really use it?

  this is an artificial trickle into a pretty big hole–it’ likely that it won’t make much difference at all. some free market we live in when things like this are proposed to really just help make the rich richer — cause where will this $800 utlimately go?

• 40. FmrMarine  |  January 19th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

  BUT BUT!!!!!!!

  Where is my MULE and 40 ACRES?

• 41. phnx  |  January 19th, 2008 at 4:15 pm

  This tax rebate plan is President Bush getting infront of the Dems and taking away an issue. This is a quick fix and not a long term solution. In addition its just another redistribution of wealth plan. So the Republicans have become the Democrats and the Democrats have become the socialists.

  Frankly both parties are pandering to the public. If the rebate is a good idea, let’s couple it with an equal REDUCTION IN SPENDING to net this out as zero increase in the debt.

  Both parties have become irresponsible when it comes to fiscal policy. They are falling all over each other to give what is not their to give.

  Once the public realizes that they can vote themselves a pay raise its all over.

• 42. TiredofLibBullShit  |  January 20th, 2008 at 9:44 am

  Agent Smear is demonstrating his status as a USEFUL IDIOT again.

  “You’re a bunch of horse’s asses if you think a measly 800 bucks is going to solve/help the coming economic meltdown.”

  Obama’s and Hillary’s plan will give even less and we do not see you bitching about that one.

  What a good little USEFUL IDIOT, don’t question what orders your handlers give you just do it. Herr Goebbels would be proud to have a brainless stooge like you under his wing.