Alternative Ways to Stimulate the Economy?

F

Fremmer

New member
During the last Republican debate, Huckabee stated that he would stimulate the economy by spending on infrastructure. That was interesting. It was an alternative to simply sending out rebate (?) checks to everyone.

Setting aside the issue of whether the government should be spending or stimulating (:D), can any of you think of any other ways (besides sending out checks) that the Government could use to stimulate the economy?

Fresh ideas are appreciated! :)
 
In general, I like the idea of the government cutting taxes and leaving us more of our own to spend as we see fit. The problem is, what they are proposing now is not really a tax cut, because even people who paid no income tax still get money, while people in upper income brackets get nothing or next to nothing. I dont understand why someone would think you could call it a tax cut. If you don't pay taxes, there is nothing to cut. Its just a government hand out for those people.

If we are going to spend the money on infrastructure, I think a good place to do it would be as a national project to develope alternative energy. We need a president, who in the style of JFK and the space program, will challenge America to develop alternative fuels within a certain time period. I would provide tax breaks to people who use alternative energy in their homes. For example, if you put solar panels or windmill up, let the expenses be 100 percent tax deductible, and possibly even a tax credit. Let all money spent by corporations on R&D of new energy be tax deductible, or a tax credit. If you buy a car that gets more than a certain number of miles per gallon, let the cost of the car be a tax deduction. These things would spur sales of various products, while at the same time get us closer to energy independence.
 
Yeah, I was thinking about that too, Unregistered. Investment in alternative energy would be another way of stimulating the economy. But one thing they want is a quick stimulus, so I'm wondering whether that should be a factor in the analysis.
 
For a quick stimulus, simply eliminate the lowest level of income taxation.

The income tax is a progressive tax. Eliminate the 10% tax bracket completely. That would given everyone who payed any income tax their money back, and would not give money to people who paid no tax.

I believe that was basically the plan at first, until Bush got cozy with Nancy Pelosi.
 
Basically, the coming tax rebate is a government issued credit card that we'll pay back with interest! It's "our own money" only "our own money" is all gone, so we're borrowing 150 billion from China, sending a little it to each American and tacking on more debt to be paid back later with interest! It's not going to help us! It's another example of W's kindergarden share the M&M's economics. I hope the country can survive until next January!
I'll either donate my share to Ron Paul ( if it's here soon ) or buy a new gun that won't be available when Hillary is president! Any semi auto should do.
 
How about removal of the federal gasoline tax!!!!!! That's be a good start to lower shipping, commuting and travel fares!
Howabout a full year of no income tax! Our budget without IRS revenue is still greater than the budget of 1998 government! Our gov has become too big and expensive. We could all afford healthcare if we weren't losing so much money each week to a wasteful gov and costly foreign policy!
 
It's not going to help us! It's another example of W's kindergarden share the M&M's economics. I hope the country can survive until next January!
Click to expand...

Congress has to approve the tax rebate and Democrats hold a majority of the seats in both houses of Congress.

As someone else pointed out, the tax rebate is a bandaid for arterial bleeding. Politicians hate to tell voters that pain and suffering are necessary, instead they try to keep the party going a little longer.
 
I heard today n NPR that congress did approve it. It'll only even have a chance at being effective if it can be implemented immediately. I think it's $600 per individual $300 children and $1200 married couples?
 
The median household income increased 4.08 times ($11,800 to $48,201) between 1975 and 2006.
The median new home price increased 6.27 times ($39,300 to $246,500) between 1975 and 2006.

Making payments on a 30-year, 6% loan on a median new home would have taken 23.96% of median income in 1975 versus 36.79% in 2006. That is the sort of trend that is not sustainable.

Giving everyone a few hundred dollars in tax rebates to squander on trinkets will not solve the country's underlying economic problems, although it might keep the party going until after the next elections.

The ideas about alternative energy sources have real merit. Creating new technologies and changing production costs in the economy (everything uses energy) could result in huge economic benefits.
 
Last edited:
Anyone know the bill number? I'd like to know how much of this "rebate" will be withheld from the successful and/or hard-working and given to the shiftless. I gather it starts phasing out at an AGI of $75,000 for couples, but I don't know how fast.

I'll bet that a lot of two-earner households near the "low income housing" developments out in California where the qualifying "low" income is $60,000, will be irritated when they open their "$600" checks to find significantly less than that.

(Looks like the $75,000 phase-out is for individuals, not couples.)
 
The "stimulus" bill has only passed the House; the Senate may, or may not, pass the same bill. Some Dem's want to add provisions for (extended unemployment (possibly other things as well). It's not a done deal yet.

Some of the suggestions I see here are just... :eek: Remove the gas tax? Energy is already too cheap in this country, because we don't pay the environmental costs.

Lowering taxes (including this ill-conceived "stimulus" package) will stimulate spending, but it's very fiscally irresponsible. If you're up to your ears in debt, you don't go handing out money! It's really just a short-term loan from the government to the people; this may devalue the dollar.

So Unregistered, I disagree that lowering taxes is the answer... unless it is matched by an even larger decrease in spending, which is unlikely. But I very much like the idea of a massive alternative energy program; if it were my decision, I'd fund such a program by imposing a significant additional gas/energy tax, and implementing a carbon credit program. The idea would be that the government sells credits to companies, and uses the proceeds to fund alternative clean energy R&D and production.
 
Making participation in the Social Security program voluntary would unleash the capital of an entire generation, and at the same time keep politicians from spending it now with the promise that taxes will cover it later.

It would also be fought vigorously by big government advocates of all stripes, who know that if given a choice, a huge majority of people would flee this Ponzi scheme before the train runs out of track.
 
As someone mentioned above, the federal fuel tax would be a good start. Virtually every product that sells in the United States is moved by truck at one point. Higher fuel equals higher cost to transport goods. Trucking companies do not simply absorb the higher cost of fuel, it is passed on in its billing rates. That in turn passes the cost on to the end consumer.
 
The median household income increased 4.08 times ($11,800 to $48,201) between 1975 and 2006.
The median new home price increased 6.27 times ($39,300 to $246,500) between 1975 and 2006.
Click to expand...

Agree with you GC70, and the problem is even more evident if you narrow the years down to the last 6 or 7 years. Median household income has stagnated or even gone down, while home price has skyrocketed.
 
Stop pouring money into Iraq and spend it here.

Close 700+ military bases around the world and spend that money here.

Stop the flow of illegal labor coming and cut off money returned to Mexico.

Stop over spending such as pouring money into corruption governments.

No guys too many incorrect foreign policies that printing a few more millions dollars and handing it out to taxpayers will only increase the debt on you, me and our children for years to come.:mad:
 
1. Cut the fed tax amt. on gas, but not eliminate it.
2. Shed unneeded federal departments such as homeland security.
3. Freeze pay increases for members of congress for no less than 12 years.
4. (Not sure if this is fact) When member of congress is voted out, benefits should cease.
5. As much as I support our military, I think it's time to start slimming down the stations that aren't any longer needed around the world. Example, bases in Germany, Japan, etc. I don't think we should pull completely out, but lower the personnel numbers down to a minimum if it isn't already and use the personnel along the U.S. borders.
6. Lower federal income tax immediately. Phase it out completely over a period of 12-16 years.
7. Tell the EPA where they can stick their policies and allow new refineries to be built. To me, this is the biggie. I think there's a common misconception that we don't have enough oil resources. In fact, I think we have enough to completely pull out of foreign reliance on oil and drill our own...offshore and on. The problem is that we haven't built any refineries in YEARS. We can't keep up with production of gasoline. That's why, besides OPEC being a monopoly, the prices are high.
8. And, lastly, bust up OPEC. Get rid of the monopoly.

Most of these I don't think a president would have the power to do, but I'd like to see him propose them...
 
Socialism - coming soon to the USA

I'm sick and tired of the government telling me how better off I'm going to be when they get EVEN MORE involved in my life.
 
Wingman, that's just too logical. That's why I vote for Ron Paul. I hope America is still generally smart enough to know that's he's best for the country and the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top