How will you spend you upcoming $600 government refund?

[gvortex7]

Simple question really: How many of you will spend part or all of your upcoming $600 government refunds on Blu-ray related items, be it players, a PS3 or movies? Of course this only applies to U.S. residents.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by gvortex7

Simple question really: How many of you will spend part or all of your upcoming $600 government refunds on Blu-ray related items, be it players, a PS3 or movies? Of course this only applies to U.S. residents.

I think the Warner announcement last week will have an effect on that money...

[Cory108]

It is a screwed up concept.

If you got a tax refund last year, you get $300. $600 if you are married and $300 for every kid.

If you paid taxes last year, you get $600 and $1200 if you are married plus $300 for every kid.

It will come out of your future taxes, so I won't even bother with it.

Or I will stick it in a cd or savings account. F*** YOU BUSH!!

[fly4rabbi]

probably going for a tv. Mine and my fiancees will be nice to put towards an hdtv.

[eleminohpee]

I will hopefully being picking up a laptop. Doubt it will have a Blu drive for that price. I just need something for school.

[blackhawktraffic]

Got a TV/monitor yesterday, 26" Sony Bravia for my desk

[cking2729]

Originally Posted by Cory108

Or I will stick it in a cd or savings account. F*** YOU BUSH!!

Of course someone had to bring politics into it. And I assume our Congress has nothing to do with this, either? Everything's the presidents fault, right?

I'll be spending mine, since that's the whole point. I'll certainly be "stimulating" the consumer electronics economy.

[Living Near Shamu]

Originally Posted by cking2729

I'll be spending mine, since that's the whole point. I'll certainly be "stimulating" the consumer electronics economy.

Hell yes! That's what I'll be doing!

[xberserker]

Help pay off my credit card.

[galz]

If your going to spend it, it would be best spent on "American Products". It is meant to regenerate our economy not foreign economies.

[Cory108]

Originally Posted by cking2729

Of course someone had to bring politics into it. And I assume our Congress has nothing to do with this, either? Everything's the presidents fault, right?

I'll be spending mine, since that's the whole point. I'll certainly be "stimulating" the consumer electronics economy.

I am not blaming anything entirely on Bush. I am not pushing any type of politics here but under Clinton we had a surplus. Under Bush, we have a deficit. This economic plan is unreal. I spend and save plenty of money in the economy. The price of gas is hurting the economy because of how the price of fuel has a direct effect on everything. Food, Blu Rays, everything. It costs more to get products to us, to make them, etc.

The economy needs to go back into "trickle down" economics. The government needs to give businesses tax breaks and give them more of an incentive to stay centralized in the US. Too many companies have moved their factories to countries overseas because of the tax benefits.

If there were more businesses staying in the US, this would create more jobs, thus generating more money in the economy.

This current plan is more of a trickle up. Give us the direct shot to stimulate the economy. I have listened to many people and the general consensus is that they will use what they get to pay bills of debt. That could help being that it will free up some debt so that the consumer will spend more. But this type of economic stimulus has never really worked.

[cking2729]

The purpose of the thread is not to discuss politics, so I'm not even going to get into a debate over it. I see how these things go all the time, and I'm not interested.

I was only responding to the fact you said F the president, as if he is the only policy maker in the entire government. I am just trying to point out that the president is only the head of state and it's unfair to characterize the blunderings of our government on his shoulders. It's easy to blame the guy since he is the figurehead, but it's also moot. There has been an opposition Congress in place for two years now, and they are equally, if not more responsible, for things that occur domestically. And a surplus or deficit depends on who is reporting it. If you include the deathtraps that are Social Security and Medicare with the tally, the U.S. had about a $400 billion deficit between the mid-1990s and early 2000s.

But anyway, next time you should just say "F the government" instead of bashing one figurehead.

[BettiePage]

Originally Posted by Cory108

under Clinton we had a surplus. Under Bush, we have a deficit.

we also are in a war on 2 fronts with billions spent and billions more to come in the future... thats not even counting the lost of life.

btw we havent raised any taxes to pay for these wars... so i would think a deficit would be natural.

[katharsis]

Of course someone had to bring politics into it. And I assume our Congress has nothing to do with this, either? Everything's the presidents fault, right?

YES!

[cking2729]

Originally Posted by BettiePage

we also are in a war on 2 fronts with billions spent and billions more to come in the future... thats not even counting the lost of life.

btw we havent raised any taxes to pay for these wars... so i would think a deficit would be natural.

So lets pull out of the war, and eliminate the billions spent. Then spend over $100 billion/year on a universal healthcare system, on top of the medicare and social security black holes. While we're at it, let's add a $25 billion/year retirement security plan, a $8 billion/year college assistance plan, and a $10 billion housing assistance plan for people that bought houses they couldn't afford in the first place. Then, what's another couple billion on a "heating assistance" plan? Wait, one more.....let's freeze the estate tax rate in 2009, which will ultimately cost us $230+ billion by 2017!!!! Now, let's call this plan "fiscally responsible" and take over Washington! Whoot Whoot!

I think the current war spending and economic stimulus plan are moot compared to the potential for limitless spending we could have in our midst after January 2009. It's quite scary actually, how we spend first and think later. Something needs to be done, and spending more money definitely is not the answer.

Originally Posted by Bigdog

Actually the government classifies you as rich if you make over 75k, or 150 combined if married. So if you make more then 75k a year, sorry but the government thinks you deserve nothing and your money should go to the welfare rejects who cant lift a finger to help themselves except for banging like rabbits to increase their welfare check.

+1. You hit the nail on the head, dude.

[PeechCobblerPie]

Originally Posted by Cory108

It is a screwed up concept.

If you got a tax refund last year, you get $300. $600 if you are married and $300 for every kid.

If you paid taxes last year, you get $600 and $1200 if you are married plus $300 for every kid.

It will come out of your future taxes, so I won't even bother with it.

Or I will stick it in a cd or savings account. F*** YOU BUSH!!

man, I once got suspended for 2 days for saying I didnt like someone in the above post. watch it.

[DeeChizzle]

Originally Posted by PeechCobblerPie

man, I once got suspended for 2 days for saying I didnt like someone in the above post. watch it.

Well if that's the case, then I hate the guy who posts below me!!!

[The Don]

Originally Posted by DeeChizzle

Well if that's the case, then I hate the guy who posts below me!!!

[Marquoz]

Yay, somebody hates me!

Edit:

Ahhh, too slow

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Cory108

It is a screwed up concept.

If you got a tax refund last year, you get $300. $600 if you are married and $300 for every kid.

If you paid taxes last year, you get $600 and $1200 if you are married plus $300 for every kid.

It will come out of your future taxes, so I won't even bother with it.

Or I will stick it in a cd or savings account. F*** YOU BUSH!!

You might as well curse the Congress too.