Building a perfect excuse

"No one could have predicted that the so-called 'economic stimulus package' championed by Drunky McStagger would have been a flop."

Well, that seems to be what the Bush crime syndicate anticipates, given the statement Drunky made yesterday about how he purportedly expects people to use their measly token "rebates."

"The money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we're seeing at the gas pump, the grocery store, and also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown," Bush said.

Bush's emphasis on fuel and food prices differed from other comments he's made since signing the economic stimulus legislation, intended to aid the economy by boosting overall consumer spending — which accounts for roughly two-thirds of the nation's economic activity.

Bush has suggested the rebates could trigger a spending spree. "When the money reaches the American people, we expect they will use it to boost consumer spending," he said last month.

By saying expressly that people could use these one-time checks to pay for such necessities as food and gas, Bush underscored the deepening challenges facing the economy.

Democrats were quick to pick up on the change of focus.

"It's galling to think that taxpayers' stimulus checks will be lining the pockets of OPEC. The sad truth is that the average American family will spend almost their entire stimulus check on higher gas prices this year," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

So we're going to use the money to enrich the oil barons? Great. I should have known.

But what's worse is that Drunky is going to have a ready-made excuse for why the "stimulus" won't work -- and I will bet you, oh, about $300 that the economy will still be in the toilet three months from now. The excuse? People will be using the money to pay bills or for savings rather than consumer spending.

If the 130 million Americans who receive the checks use them for spending sprees, the stimulus plan would give at least a temporary boost to the economy. But after two years of soaring gas prices, falling home values and rising jobless rates, many consumers in Palm Beach County and the Treasure Coast say they're not in the mood to shop.

"I'm just going to put it in the bank," said Kist, a public health nurse at the Palm Beach County Health Department.

She doubts the checks will do much to stimulate the economy.

"It's not that large an amount of money," she said.

Lunching at the fountain outside the West Palm Beach Public Library, Valerie Rhaburn, 39, said Friday she will put her payment in the bank, though she'll also spend some of it as Bush hopes - to pay for a baby shower she's giving.

John Batista, 71, who bags groceries at a Publix in Stuart, said he will use his check to pay off credit cards.

The theory behind the economic stimulus is simple: Millions of Americans will get their checks, then go on a mass shopping spree. Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of the country's economic growth.

"What they'd ideally like everybody to do is to go out to Wal-Mart or Home Depot or Macy's and buy something," said Chris McCarty, director of the University of Florida's consumer confidence survey. "The problem is many people are likely to spend it on servicing existing debt, and that's money that's already been spent."

Bingo. See, Americans already have spent the money. The debt is one reason, if not the biggest reason, we're in the mess we are. The rebate is, quite simply, another Republican attempt to pander to the voters in an election year, so they can say, "See how great Republicans are? We gave you $600. Now vote for us."

The economy is too far gone for the pandering to work. It's certainly too far gone for $600 per person to help a hell of a lot ... especially when the bulk of that is going to credit card companies and oil companies. And the Bush crime syndicate knows it won't work -- I'm sure of that. But just watch for the excuses in a few months' time ... you know they'll be coming.

The last word on the tax rebate

Once again proving that I am a complete fucking moron for even trying to write about economic matters, I must update my post from this morning about the economic stimulus package. Turns out that you don't have to pay it back next year.

Do I have to pay the rebate back?

No. And here's why.

Your rebate is a one-time tax cut - an advance on a credit you'll receive on your 2008 return.

It's based on your 2007 income initially. If it turns out that your 2008 income and number of children would have qualified you for a larger rebate than the one you received, you'll be sent the difference. If it turns out your 2008 income was lower than in 2007 and you should have gotten a lower rebate, you get to keep the difference.

"If you were supposed to receive a larger payment than you did, you will get the extra money," said Treasury spokesman Andrew DeSouza. "If you received more than what you should have gotten, you will not be penalized."

Of course, I also learned from the article that I won't be getting a rebate at all. [Insert frowny face.] At least not till I file my 2008 taxes next year. Thanks to a certain game show, my 2007 income was artificially high, beyond the limit for a single filer ... so no soup for me, until I show the IRS how much little I really make this year. Add to this the fact that I actually owe California more money -- despite having it withheld originally -- and I'm beginning to question the whole exercise ...

Anyway, it's patently clear that I need to leave the economic stuff to sweaty lunks who, you know, actually understand that shit. If I ever try to get into economics again, please, for the love of all that is holy and decent, hit me in the nose with a rolled-up newspaper or something. Thanks in advance.

Before you rush out and spend your tax rebate ...

... please note that it's not a gift, or strictly speaking even a rebate. As I've been saying (at least on the radio show) for a while now, it's an advance:

The package, which passed the Senate 81-16 [and the House 380-34], will send rebate checks to 130 million Americans in amounts of $300 to $600 for people who have an income between $3,000 and $75,000, plus $300 per child. Couples earning up to $150,000 would get $1,200.

The checks are an advance on next year's refunds, and most, if not all of the money, will be deducted from taxpayers' refunds in 12 months' time.

I mean, if you want to spend it now, that's your decision ... but you'll have to pay it back, one way or the other, next year.

Thanks, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi! You two are the bestest!

/snark

(I can haz real congreshnul leederz pleez?)

UPDATE (3:07 pm 2/8/08): A couple of commenters have pointed out that CNN.com revised the article, removing the boldfaced quote above, because supposedly it's not a check that will have to be repaid. One anonymous commenter explained that "technically it is an advance, but it is an advance on a one time tax credit given to everyone. You won't owe more on your taxes because of this."

So it's a credit that is being given now (well, by May), rather than next year during filing? I'm getting confused. Let me see what some other sources have to say and I'll get back to you ...

UPDATE (3:16 pm 2/8/08): Okay, it's beginning to make a little more sense. I found the Republican part of the stimulus package (that is, the part that helps the upper class and not the lower and middle classes):

The biggest winners in the economic rescue plan now awaiting President Bush's signature are likely to be Americans with more expensive homes who will be able to refinance their home loans at cheaper rates.

For those who can take advantage of them, the bill's mortgage market provisions are likely to give more of a long-term financial boost than the tax rebates of $600 directed to individuals and $1,200 to couples, economists said.

The stimulus package temporarily raises the maximum size of mortgages that government-sponsored mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can purchase and market as securities from $417,000 to as high as $729,750 in expensive parts of the country such as New York and California.

You know this is good news for Republicans because the photo accompanying the article features Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), and David Vitter (R-Pampers Louisiana) ... all Republicans, all people who are happy because they can send piddly checks to you and me while the people who really matter, the ones who write them their big campaign donations (directly or indirectly, doesn't matter), will get a big financial boost.

I'm sure they'll all be running right out to WalMart to spend, spend, SPEND!!!

UPDATE (8:07 pm 2/8/08): Yes, I'm a dumbass. See final update above.