How Stimulating!

It looks as though Congress has just passed the much talked-about, $150 billion "economic stimulus package" that will surely be signed by Dubya in the next few days. There are many interesting observations that can be made about this piece of legislation, but for now, I'd just like to talk about how (1) the bill highlights how both political parties (well, maybe not so much the Dems) so predictably go into Spineless Mode when the general election is only months away, and (2) which Americans won't be getting jack shit in terms of a tax rebate, and why I think it's just plain stupid.

As for the first issue, this bill epitomizes big-g0vernment, interventionist, anti-laissez faire economics at a time when the country is already up to its eyeballs in debt. But does anyone think that the Repubs would take a stand against passing it? Not when they're so at risk of losing the White House come November, that's for sure. In the current election year poltical climate, there'd be no way somone could oppose this bill without being portrayed as being against giving "working families" (see why I hate that term, below) much-needed relief during a faltering economy. Christ, it was President Bush who proposed the package in the first place.

With respect to the second issue - which Americans qualify for the tax rebates being doled out under the stimulus plan - I don't agree that the income eligibility cutoffs prescribed by the plan make the most sense. Currently, the plan basically would award rebates to individuals making up to $75K and families making up to $150K (with graduated decreases in rebates for families earning up to $170K). Being a "stimulus" package, it's obviously meant to stimulate the economy by putting money into the hands of consumers, who, ideally, will then put the money back into the economy (i.e., by spending or investing it). It seems to me, however, that middle and low-income Americans (the ones who qualify for the rebates under the package) are the ones most likely to hoard/save the money in their piggy banks in our current times of economic hardship. While I'm no Adam Smith (or John Kenneth Galbraith, for the sake of sounding more recent), I do understand that even keeping this money in the bank would give banks more money to lend, thereby moving more money, thereby theoretically having a positive trickle-down effect on the overall economy. (Or maybe I'm completely wrong on this. The Host will surely call me out on the particulars of this one.) But I presume that this is not what lawmakers are envisioning in passing this Plan. Rather, the idea is for people to spend their mini-windfalls on new DVD players at Wal Mart, or use them for down payments on a new Ford F250 XLT with a reinforced bed and extended cab. (Yay Consumerism!) If this is true, I find it interesting, but not surprising, that Congress actually expects - nay, wants - Americans to act imprudently (spending their tax rebates on consumer goods) instead of doing the smart thing (saving their money for the potentially increasingly difficult times ahead).

I also find the income eligibility cutoffs a little ridiculous. Much for the reasons discussed in the previous paragraph, high-income types are the ones most likely to spend this kind of previously unexpected "free" money without thinking twice, mainly because they're the ones most economically insulated from the otherwise gloomy circumstances. But alas, this package obviously is not for those of us "lucky" enough to make that kind of cash. As touted by Nancy Pelosi, it's for "working families." And we all know that families who bust their asses to earn more than $170K per year don't really "work." They're just lucky to be where they are - the beneficiaries of lifelong privilege or some profound cosmic stroke of good fortune - and it is their collective duty to take care of, or at least bear more of the tax burden for, those less fortunate, which apparently include "working families." For example, lawyers who bill 2300 hours per year, working countless late nights and weekends while barely putting a dent in their six-figure law school debt aren't "working." They make too much money, and are therefore evil! (Thankfully, I don't exactly fit this description, except for the part about being evil.)

In closing, I'd like to thank my blog-mates for allowing me to shoot from the hip one more time.