Why didn't the money borrowed for the stimulus package go directly to American tax payers?

Unluckily, that $200,000 number has been floating around for a while and is not true. Even using the more recent figure that the various bailouts will cost $2.5 trillion in total, with 230 million citizens in the US, that would work out to less than $10,000 per person (closer to $8,000). And while that might sound like a lot, remember that much of that first $750 billion is going to be repaid, which the consumer would not be expected to do (so in reality, you can take $3,000 away from the $8,000 and bring the payout down to $5,000). Of the remaining bailout, much of that will go into people's hands (the $8,000 first time home buyers' credit, more jobs, etc.), but even if only 1/3 goes directly into consumers hands, that only leaves a bailout of $3,600 per person - not quite the $200,000 that is being thrown around.

While $3,600 may seem like alot, in reality, by spreading it around to the entire population, you do less economically speaking than targeted bailouts. I doubt that $3,600 will induce a lot of people to run out and buy a car, thus, the American auto makers will still be hurting and have to lose jobs, pretty much negating a lot of teh effect. In addition, as was found out in the first stimulus check, people don't spend, they either saved the money of paid down credit cards - neither of which stimulates the economy (people paying down the cards don't run right out and push them back up a gain - some do, but most don't).

Targeted bailouts especially those that have a payback factor, do more to rebuild the economy by saving jobs and allowing companies to create a stronger financial foundation - the ripple effects of this spending permeate the economy quicker and greater than the stimulus-type bailouts.

With the 130 million tax returns filed, that works out to be $6000 per tax payer 790 (nine zeros) divided by 130 (six zeros).

Would that have worked better? Impossible to say. So, if it was just based on economics, it would be a toss up, matter of opinion.

But there is an element of politics involved here, too. The Democrats, having complete control over house, senate, and presidency, pretty much gets to say how the money is spent.

The banks: the 1930s depression was aggravated by a collapse of the banking system. The government (both parties) wanted to avoid that.

The auto industry: Unions would be hurt the worst in a reorganization (bankruptcy). The Democrats wanted to avoid that (but probably can't).

The housing: very public target. Good publicity

The others: Democratic programs that have been on hold for awhile.

With the one hundred thirty million tax returns filed, that works out to be $6000 in accordance to tax payer 790 (9 zeros) divided by skill of utilising one hundred thirty (six zeros). might desire to that have worked extra advantageous constructive? impossible to declare. So, if it grew to become into extremely in accordance with economics, it extremely is a toss up, count form of opinion. yet there is an component to politics in touch genuine right here, too. The Democrats, having complete administration over residing homestead, senate, and presidency, fairly plenty gets to declare how the money is spent. The banks: the Thirties melancholy grew to become into annoyed by skill of utilising a fall down of the banking kit. the government (the two activities) needed to avert that. the motor vehicle industry: Unions might desire to be injury the worst in a reorganization (economic disaster). The Democrats needed to avert that (yet probably will now no longer have the capability to). The housing: very public objective. good exposure The others: Democratic training that have been on carry for awhile.

The reason our economy is f---ed up now is because the economy was "over" stimulated for the past 5 years with people living well above their means. All that spending created more and more jobs and "wealth" which created the illusion of prosperity, but when the bill arrived the bubble burst.

Giving the money back to the people will just be another flush down the toilet by creating another short-lived bubble.

Why do politicians feel the need to re-"stimulate" the economy and bring it back to its "glorious" days that led to this crap, is beyond me. Every one of them will give you another "economist" opinion on why the stimulus is good for you. You pay for their opinions, you pay for them to take a gamble with your money.

Steve D is absolutely correct. Remember, they did as you suggest last year when they send cash out to all tax payers. What they found was that people were rational and paid down their debt, While this is the correct thing to do on an individual basis, it does not really help us in the current situation. Actual spending is needed and that is what the government is doing.

Because they prioritized the banks and businesses..to put it differently...it's a global situation largely created by the United States. If the U.S. Banks fail, it's sparks off a global economic collapse, which we're actually teetering on the edge of..

Granny Crabtree: "But we agree, the fix should've been from the bottom up! There's so many problems a measly coupla thousand would help to offset in these critical times..Ah should know..Frank just lost his job!" (sniff!..wrings hands on towel)

Source(s):

Farmer Crabtree: "Ah feel like I'm fixin'- ta eat crow-pie!"

Big Business Helps to Identify “the Last Days”

By molding personalities, big business is helping to provide the evidence of “the last days” as found at 2 Timothy 3:1-4: But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with [including the difficulty of coping with economic anxieties] will be here. For men will be . . .

Lovers of themselves: Materialists are self-centered, an attitude encouraged by commercial advertising, which argues: ‘You deserve the best. Be good to yourself. Look out for number one’

Lovers of money: American humorist Mark Twain once said: “Some men worship rank, some worship heroes, some worship power, some worship God, . . . but they all worship money”

Self-assuming, haughty: A German politician said of foot-dragging chemical firms asked to stop polluting: “I find the predominating attitude quite bad. It is the arrogance of power”

Unthankful, disloyal: English writer Thomas Fuller said, “Riches rather enlarge than satisfy appetites” and, “The usual trade and commerce is cheating all round by consent”

Having no natural affection: Firms that for reasons of profit sell developing nations products outlawed elsewhere or that locate hazardous factories in lands with less stringent safety regulations show little concern for the lives of others

Not open to any agreement, slanderers: Economist Adam Smith said that “commerce, which ought naturally to be, among nations, as among individuals, a bond of union and friendship, has become the most fertile source of discord and animosity”

Without self-control, fierce: Excessive installment buying, credit-card spending sprees, and the “buy now, pay later” mentality, fostered by commerce for personal gain, betray a lack of self-control; some commercial pursuits pander to human weaknesses and make fortunes from drugs, vice, and gambling

Without love of goodness, betrayers: The newspaper The German Tribune says: “Where the colossal cost of coping with environmental pollution is concerned, moral standards can leave much to be desired.” People with no moral standards find it easy to betray others for the sake of personal gain

Headstrong: Powerful groups, such as gun and tobacco lobbies, stubbornly spend fortunes trying to dictate political policies to ensure high sales, even though their wares endanger health and public safety

Puffed up with pride: Possessions are no reason for pride, despite the claims of materialists. Greek fabulist Aesop said: “Outside show is a poor substitute for inner worth”

Lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God: Commercial entertainment stresses pleasures to the exclusion of spirituality and has created a generation of hedonistic pleasure addicts.

classism and ideology.

cuz they wanted to go gambling in las vegas, duh...