Thankyou to the US goverment- "I am going to Disney World"

[capecodhome]

I am hoping with the extra tax money the goverment is giving to us to put back in the economy, I will put money down for a vacation in 2009 :sohappy:.

 

[durangojim]

Give the rebate to all of us who paid income taxes, then get rid of the Federal income tax, and change to a national sales tax. At least that would be "fair". The idea that people would get these rebates who did not even pay income tax, and people who are contributing the most amount to taxes get nothing seems very odd. Kind of wreaks of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" IMO:lookaroun

 

[mkt]

Don't get your hopes up yet. We live in a country, thats the greatest country in the world,

As a US Citizen and now an expat, I question that comment completely. In fact, I disagree with it wholeheartedly.

but is run by people of questionable competence.

Which is the same as all countries. It's a shame that the 90% of politicians make the 10% look so bad.

 

[MichWolv]

I shall take this opportunity to vent and say that this particular "stimulus package" is one of the worst ideas that Congress has had in recent times...and that's saying something, becuase they've had pretty darned dumb ideas.

We are in (or headed for) a recession brought on in large part because people were spending beyond their means for years by taking out loans that never should have been approved. Those loans are going bad, causing the economy to shrink, and our government is going to fix it by giving us all a little money to spend. And where is the government getting this money -- borrowing!!! And to make it worse, the government is giving us the money in the form of checks, rather than just lowering our taxes, because we are more likely to spend the money, instead of saving it, if it feels like a windfall. Economists, however, will tell you that our savings rate in the US is way too low for the good of the economy in the long run.

Until the government balances its spending with its revenue, our economy will suffer. This stimulus package will make things worse, not better.

Now, having said all that, I am glad to see the a lot of people will at least be able to use the money to have some fun at Disney World.

 

[wdwmomof3]

Ours will be going right to savings.

 

[ClemsonTigger]

I shall take this opportunity to vent and say that this particular "stimulus package" is one of the worst ideas that Congress has had in recent times...and that's saying something, becuase they've had pretty darned dumb ideas.

We are in (or headed for) a recession brought on in large part because people were spending beyond their means for years by taking out loans that never should have been approved. Those loans are going bad, causing the economy to shrink, and our government is going to fix it by giving us all a little money to spend. And where is the government getting this money -- borrowing!!! And to make it worse, the government is giving us the money in the form of checks, rather than just lowering our taxes, because we are more likely to spend the money, instead of saving it, if it feels like a windfall. Economists, however, will tell you that our savings rate in the US is way too low for the good of the economy in the long run.

Until the government balances its spending with its revenue, our economy will suffer. This stimulus package will make things worse, not better.

Now, having said all that, I am glad to see the a lot of people will at least be able to use the money to have some fun at Disney World.

True, but the disincentives to saving are significant. If you wanted to stimulate savings, remove the double (or triple in the case of some investments) taxes associated with trying to save.

 

[jt04]

As a US Citizen and now an expat, I question that comment completely. In fact, I disagree with it wholeheartedly.

Since you have chosen to run away and become an "expat" (which you seem to constantly remind us of) does it really matter what you think?

 

[k.hunter30]

I shall take this opportunity to vent and say that this particular "stimulus package" is one of the worst ideas that Congress has had in recent times...and that's saying something, becuase they've had pretty darned dumb ideas.

We are in (or headed for) a recession brought on in large part because people were spending beyond their means for years by taking out loans that never should have been approved. Those loans are going bad, causing the economy to shrink, and our government is going to fix it by giving us all a little money to spend. And where is the government getting this money -- borrowing!!! And to make it worse, the government is giving us the money in the form of checks, rather than just lowering our taxes, because we are more likely to spend the money, instead of saving it, if it feels like a windfall. Economists, however, will tell you that our savings rate in the US is way too low for the good of the economy in the long run.

Until the government balances its spending with its revenue, our economy will suffer. This stimulus package will make things worse, not better.

Now, having said all that, I am glad to see the a lot of people will at least be able to use the money to have some fun at Disney World.

American's actually have a negative savings rate.

 

[MichWolv]

True, but the disincentives to saving are significant. If you wanted to stimulate savings, remove the double (or triple in the case of some investments) taxes associated with trying to save.

Right. That's my point. The government is going give us money is exactly the that is most likely to lead to spending rather than saving, when what we need is the opposite.

Beyond the scope of this thread, but I actually think a national sales tax would be better in the long run than the income tax system we have, in part because of the strange incentives we have to spend instead of save. Getting there would be so painful that I doubt it'll ever happen, though.

 

[MichWolv]

American's actually have a negative savings rate.

I've seen some measures put it negative, others slightly positive. In any event, much lower than would be in our long-term best interests.

 

[dandaman]

November of 2006, which was two months before the law went into effect in January of 2007. If you waited until February of 2007 to apply, then it is not surprising you got caught in the landslide of waiting.
I'm not defending the government's red tape or slowness in any way, just pointing out that with just a little better planning, you (and others) would likely have avoided the problem.

I actually just remembered: we actually waited until February because, had I not waited until my 16th birthday, I would have had to renew in 5 years. Now I get to renew in 10. :wave:

 

[mkt]

Since you have chosen to run away and become an "expat" (which you seem to constantly remind us of) does it really matter what you think?

It's not called running away if no one is after you, you use a moving company, and do the move publicly.

Anyway, as long as I still pay income taxes to the US, I do feel my opinion on US issues matters.

Got a problem with me? Ignore me.

 

[slappy magoo]

So, if you don't want tax breaks for the rich, then you favor no tax breaks at all. Otherwise, the tax breaks(if they don't give them to the rich as well) will favor some class of people. You seem to be against favoritism of tax breaks so I assume you are for no tax cuts.

I'm against tax breaks for the rich, for anyone, when the nation is deficit spending like shopaholics that nonetheless got a pre-approved credit card in the mail. What I'm against is borrowing money from other countries to give to Americans regardless of income bracket, saying "It's your money, it's your taxes, you deserve some back" and then have the borrowed money be paid for by future generations so we all could take a vacation or buy a Wii, just because it's an election year.

Again, if you're getting a rebate, I don't blame anyone for spending it, wisely or foolishly or any which way. Just don't think you won't be paying it back, WE ALL won't be paying it back, one way or another, and certainly don't "thank" the government for it, which is, after all, the original gist of the thread.

 

[JDM]

I actually just remembered: we actually waited until February because, had I not waited until my 16th birthday, I would have had to renew in 5 years. Now I get to renew in 10. :wave:

And that's perfectly fine and understandable....but that's why you ended up in the long queue with everyone else. All I'm saying is that the Passport people are not to blame for your (or anyone else's) desire to postpone applying.
After all, it's not as if they didn't publicize the heck out of it, especially in our area (if you notice, we live in the same general vicinity).

 

[MichWolv]

I'm against tax breaks for the rich, for anyone, when the nation is deficit spending like shopaholics that nonetheless got a pre-approved credit card in the mail. What I'm against is borrowing money from other countries to give to Americans regardless of income bracket, saying "It's your money, it's your taxes, you deserve some back" and then have the borrowed money be paid for by future generations so we all could take a vacation or buy a Wii, just because it's an election year.

.

I've always hated the "it's your money, we're giving it back to you" sound bite. It's quite effective - certainly, I'd rather keep "my money" than give it somebody else -- but it isn't really meaningful, because it ignores the fact that the government cannot continue to endlessly spend more money than it takes in. One of the reasons budget deficits are so detrimental is because they limit the government's ability to stimulate the economy when need be. If the budget were balanced (or in a light surplus position), the government could respond to economic slowdowns with far fewer consequences. Indeed, the government can best smooth out bumps if it runs a surplus during good years, and then dips into deficit positions during downturns; essentially, the govt. replaces some of the private spending that dries up with government spending. The deficits would be quickly paid back once the economy gets healthy again. Instead, we constantly run a deficit, and then when the economy suffers, we argue that a boost is needed from the government, giving us more deficits. We have to pay it back sometime.

As for tax cuts for the rich, I should be all for them, because I benefit to a significant extent. But while I'd always like to pay less taxes than I do now, I can honestly say that I don't need a tax cut to live comfortably. Many lower-income people are in a much more difficult situation. Give mine to somebody else, please, or better yet, get spending in line before any more tax cuts.

 

[dandaman]

And that's perfectly fine and understandable....but that's why you ended up in the long queue with everyone else.

Well, I understand the wait now... I thought you meant the deadline was for as recent as a month ago. Still a bit peeved about the fact that when they finally got around to it, they told me my info was wrong and unprocessed, but there you have it. :lol:

 

[shawn]

Can't We Just Be Happy For The People That Is Allowing To Go To Disney World Like The Thread Was Intended

 

[slappy magoo]

I'm always happy when people can go to WDW, I just don't know why we'd be thanking Uncle Sam for the privilege.

Except of course, if the economy were better, more people could afford to go, meaning resorts would be sold out and the parks would be overcrowded.

So, thanks for that...I guess...

 

[WildcatDen]

yeah, because THIS Congress has been so good at standing up to the President so far, :ROFLOL: They're like Pavlov's dogs, all the president has to say is "yer weak on terrrrrr" and they fold like a house of cards every single time. it's not going to take much for these weak-kneed Dems to pass tax rebates to a desperate and angry populace during an election year.

 

[jenjen1127]

I have a question I hope someone can answer. In reading the news about the rebate it is clear about the $600 and $1200 amounts with the $300 per child. But can anyone explain the piece about the $300 for the people who earn $3000 or more but pay no tax. Does this mean if you did your taxes and made more than $3000 and got a total refund of your taxes based on your return that you are not eligible for the $600 rebate? Maybe I'm looking into the wording too much but I'm wondering if my daughter who earned $24,000 and has one child will only get a $300 rebate since in doing her taxes she got a total refund. I'm also wondering if she is only due the $300 would she be entitled another $300 for her child. Wording is ambituous to say the least. Does anyone know the answer?

 

[PigletIsMyCat]

As for tax cuts for the rich, I should be all for them, because I benefit to a significant extent. But while I'd always like to pay less taxes than I do now, I can honestly say that I don't need a tax cut to live comfortably. Many lower-income people are in a much more difficult situation. Give mine to somebody else, please, or better yet, get spending in line before any more tax cuts.

Agreed. Give it to me!! LOL. But I can't get drawn into a political discussion. I once said 'communisim works on paper' and almost got lynched.:lookaroun