We need another Stimulus Bill now.

[kentuck]

But different from the other.

Instead of a $12-15 tax break in each paycheck, it should be in a lump sum. Over $200 billion dollars was spent in the last stimulus on this piecemeal tax break. It should be in a lump sum to people. An extra $600 lump sum will seem like more money than an extra $13 per week and people will spend it on something they want or need. It will help the economy more.

Also, we should re-instate revenue-sharing for the states with a new stimulus. The states can spend that money to create jobs where they are most needed, roads, schools, bridges, whatever.

This needs to be done immediately. It would instill more confidence in the economy and create more jobs.

It should be a minimum of $500 billion dollars. Otherwise, we risk sliding back into the hole of this deep recession.

The bottom line is that people need money to spend. Many workers make just enough to pay for the necessities of life and have nothing extra to spend. Many years of unfair labor practices by the businesses of this country, where little goes to labor and much goes to the top, has led to this serious condition.

[xchrom]

1. i think we might get the 50 billion for infrastructure --

but i think that's gonna be it.

the deficit hawks hold all the cards for the foreseeable future.

[kentuck]

2. We need at least 10 times as much.

We have about 135 million workers in this economy. We need to put money in their pockets.

[babylonsister]

3. Good luck getting that through Congress.

But tax cuts for the rich? No problem!

[kentuck]

6. It would be a good political argument...

...to tell the people that we are going to take the $700 billion dollars from the millionaires and billionaires taxcuts and put it in the pockets of the working people to help this economy. That would be a winning political issue, even if they called it "class warfare".

[babylonsister]

8. But it's not going to happen, because rethugs and even some

Dems are not in this for their constituents, but for themselves.

[kentuck]

9. Maybe not...

But I am saying, we need it.

[babylonsister]

10. ...and I agree wholeheartedly. nt

[Uben]

4. A lump sum is always nice, but......

...what America needs is jobs! Americans are good workers and they have pride. They would rather have a job that gives them some sense of security than a one time lump sum that leaves them wondering what is in store for them in the future.

We need to start making stuff again and get away from these service jobs that pay squat. We need to rid the country of the greed mongers who put personal wealth over national financial security. It has to be done by the people we elect to office, and we have to hold them accountable for their votes.

As long as democrats and republicans are at each others throats, it will never happen. This old game of one-upmanship has got to stop. When I hear the republicans say they will start investigations or impeachment proceedings, it just turns my stomach. That is exactly what we don't need. Why can't this country produce a man or a cause we can ALL get behind? Will it take another 9/11 to bring us together? God, I hope not.

[kentuck]

7. But, when people spend money, it creates jobs ...

They are more likely to stimulate demand by spending $600 than by spending $13 per week. Otherwise, your points are well-taken.

[Uben]

13. I know Kentuck.....

...and god knows a lot of Americans could use that lump sum right about now.

My working days are over, thank goodness. I am retired with a comfortable margin of financial security, but I long to see the America of the sixties return. I'd like to see the tracts of small affordable homes being built again, and not these mini-mansions we see today. I long to see the day when a young man or woman who wasn't born into wealth or priviledge be able to go out and get a job that actually covers the necessities and enables them to save some for old age.

I preach to my two daughters to save money. That's how I did it, how my dad did it, and how my grandparents did it. Asking today's kids to do without seems to fall on deaf ears. There's always a new gadget or service that seems to be a "must have" and even those that cannot afford will go out and spend their last dime to acquire. The concept of doing without to assure future security seems to have been lost somewhere along the way. It's like everyone lives for today. Until we can change that mindset, things will not change, and I'm afraid the only way we will ever get there is for these same people to experience dire consequences, which, to be honest, a lot are now starting to do.

I can afford pretty much anything I want, yet I have never owned a new car. I don't have an Iphone, or clone thereof, or an Ipad.
I can receive calls and make calls on my old cell phone. That's all I need it for. It costs me $15/mo. My car is 8 yrs old, still in good shape, so I intend to keep it for a few more years. I eat out about once a week, and I usually try to do that as cheap as possible. The wife and I rarely spend over $10 for both of us.

Why would someone worth close to two million dollars do such a thing? That's the way I was raised! Frugality is a practice that has served me pretty well, and a it's really hard to break...for me. I just can't spend a lot of money on what I consider to be junk. Am I cheap? Well...yeah, I guess I am, on some things. I do give a lot to charity, both time and money. I volunteer over a hundred hours a year to charitable causes and raise thousands of dollars each year for them, mostly child related causes.

And, if I died tomarrow? No regrets. I was born in what I consider to be the best age in American history to a lower middle class family. My grandparents were share-croppers, so we've come a long way in just a couple of generations! I'm not sure many Americans even have that chance these days. I want those days back!

[kentuck]

14. As you probably know...

Wages stopped keeping up with productivity about 1979. Since then, people have been making less and less, making it more difficult to save money for anything.

When the credit scheme was hatched, and everyone had numerous credit cards, they could buy just about anything they wanted, on credit. Then they would re-finance their homes to pay off their credit card debts and that worked well until the housing bubble burst.

Now, young people and workers across the country, find themselves working for poverty wages, just enough to meet necessities and nothing more. Because the big hogs took it all.

[xchrom]

5. you're not wrong. nt

[stray cat]

11. Unemployment, food stamps, poverty income levels

They should get help as they need the money and will spend it, the rest of us don't need deficit spending to put the money in savings where it has no stimulus value

Should we go more into debt to give millionaires more money with a blanket handout of cash that the entire society has to pay for?

[kentuck]

12. I agree that it should be targeted...

How many people in this country make less than $30,000 per year? I would guess more than half? Those people need help.

[andym]

15. Perhaps for a small business startup grant fund

To allow some of the unemployted a chance to start their own business and then hire others.
Some money for small business expansion might be a good idea too.

Business could be targeted to help achieve useful social goals, such as green energy and conservation among other things.

Big business would be completely excluded.