Does the idea of throwing money at us make you think that the stimulus package will heal our broken economy? Did the stimulus package of 2008 help us any. Most people got $600 per person, and if you were on Social Security you most likely got $300 each. I got a $300 check. The checks most likely went to pay past due bills for people that have lost their jobs, which doesn’t help the economy at all, because the money is just going to pay for a dead horse, so to speak.
The idea for the stimulus is for the American people to spend the money, which was supposed to stimulate the economy to put people back to work. The trouble with the stimulus of 2008 was that the checks were not big enough for many people to buy big ticket items such as cars or put down payments on homes.
On December 8, 2008 there was an article on The Times Online that Barack Obama would order a stimulus package that would be greater than $1 trillion. The idea is obvious. I just stated it above in the preceding paragraph. What if, though, the people do what they did with the 2008 stimulus package? What if they pay off existing debt, or save it in the bank? That won’t help the economy.
What if though, our president did something different this time? Let’s divide $1 trillion by the number of people in the United States, counting all the children in every family. That would give every person about $4,000 a piece. Now if you are like the famous Dugger family and have 18 kids in a 2 parent home, that is 20 people in one home. That family would get $80,000 in stimulus money. Most people aren’t like the Dugger’s, but the math is the same. The $1 trillion divided up would give every person in the US the same amount of money per person.
The only way to heal the economy, though, is to use this money to buy new goods and services. I read an article (the last source listed below) of an author (Don Phelan) I subscribe to on Factoidz, and he suggested to ensure the stimulus money would help heal the economy there should be some kind of control on the money. He suggested that every family received a debit card with the amount of money the family would be eligible for loaded into the card. He suggested that there be a time limit for the card to be used, and if the card wasn’t used in that length of time the debit card would be null and void. I think this is a fantastic idea.
Consider this. If you had a debit card that was only good for a limited time, say 12 to 18 months from the US Treasury Department for $4,000 times every person in your household, and you could only use it to purchase new goods and services, this would be a good thing. There would be people flocking at the car dealerships; there would be folks putting down payments on homes. As a result the car dealerships would need a steady influx of automobiles, which would put the auto companies back to work. The housing market would pick up, because millions of people would be going back to work.
Some of the services that could be paid for by the stimulus could be childcare. When parents can pay for childcare, they can return to work. Students could pay for college tuition, pay for housing, pay for books, and supplies, as well as clothing. Textile workers would be back at work, because there would be more people buying clothes made in the USA. Many of the goods we buy are made in China; if we put people back to work here in America our economy would be on its way to recovery.
As part of the stimulus, consider an $11 trillion tax cut. There would be more money in every paycheck to be used to get out and spend money. It’s not so hard to understand why our economy is failing. We operate on a supply and demand economy. If people are not buying cars, homes, and other items and services people will be out of work. When people are out of work they can’t spend. It’s a vicious cycle.
If handled in the right way our economy may have a chance to recover; however, just to throw money at a problem with no controls of how that money is used, then it might not help the economy all that much.