It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So, we could of all received $9,718 ? and possibly more?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
money.cnn.com...


Question: "If we just gave all the bailout money to taxpayers, how much would we each get? I've seen $25,000, $300,000, $1 million - what's the real answer?" -- Miranda Marquit, Logan, Utah

Answer: $9,718.49

To arrive at that figure, CNNMoney.com took the total of the bank bailout, $700 billion, and added that to the proposed stimulus spending in the House of Representatives bill, $819 billion. That totals $1.519 trillion.
We then divide that number by 156.3 million, which was the total number of U.S. filers in 2008.

So: $1.519 trillion divided by 156.3 million equals $9,718.49 per U.S. taxpayer.



The way these Bailouts and Stimulus packages are being thrown around just hurts.
It just really hurts.

And that $9,718 is for every taxpayer... What if we took out the top 25% who are living comfortably?

It would then be about $13,500



I think it's now become obvious... they are trying to crash the economy.

Operation Bernhard II is in full effect.
en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 2-2-2009 by Doomsday 2029]




posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
I believe it has been discussed however the money would be going into debt repayment rather than a stimulation of goods and services. In other words it would be going to the ones that created the mess in the first place and the other benefactors of the bailouts and stimulus plan.

Also America is in an unusual position with China just now and does not want to supply another stimulus to them in the form of lower income families purchasing commodities from walmart again. China was let down that the promised returns on rice, bean, peanut butter , oil and cereal, was not much better during the last stimulus.

Another check in the hands of the needy would be nice, but it is not going to change anything other help the wise prepare for the inevitable.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
I believe it has been discussed however the money would be going into debt repayment rather than a stimulation of goods and services. In other words it would be going to the ones that created the mess in the first place and the other benefactors of the bailouts and stimulus plan.


Yes and no.

For those with debt to the banks, yes. To those of us with no debt to the banks, it would have been used to stimulate the economy through purchases.

Then, with those indebted to the banks, they at least would have been paying for the loans themselves instead of still being unable to pay the loans while the banks have their big fat checks.

The way I see it. Sorry if I misunderstood anything you wrote.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
The higher rates you heard about were based on all the money that went out including the bailout plans. Some money was received under the radar so to speak and estimated a total spending of close to 7 trillion in another thread on here somewhere. That's where you end up with the 26,000 or so.

But ya just the govt. bailouts was under 10,000 but still would have been nice.

I would have a brand new truck right now even with the lower number. Maybe saved someones job because of it.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Really its a dream to think the government would actually give money to an individual, but the government bailout was shameful, they gave that much money to corporations with the hopes they would re invest, I really do not see a difference in corporate welfare as opposed bailing out individuals, but see the thing some people forget is that the bailout is not a handout it is a loan, so they made these loans from the taxpayers to the corporations and banks, but I thought banks are supposed to make loans.

The reason why taxpayers will never see money coming directly to you is that it would have to be a grant, not a loan, that will never happen, imagine the government giving each taxpayer money upfront, but having to manage the loans on an individual basis.

This entire thing is a mess, also how many people did their taxes that own a home? there is a tax credit that allows you to get like 10% deduction or something but it is really a 0 percent loan, in other words you get a break on your taxes now but they take it back over like 5 years in your upcoming tax years.

The American people have been had and it is pitiful.


[edit on 2-2-2009 by phinubian]



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Why do the people have to borrow their own money?


Why does the public have to go to banks to get money to buy and sell with? Isn't the bank getting that money FROM the public in the first place?


Wouldn't eliminating the banks leave that much more money for the people?


A common-sense question people should be asking.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
I believe it has been discussed however the money would be going into debt repayment rather than a stimulation of goods and services. In other words it would be going to the ones that created the mess in the first place and the other benefactors of the bailouts and stimulus plan.


While I am opposed to any and all of these bailouts and I do not believe that any act of redistribution of wealth is moral or Constitutional, I'd like to make a small statement about this "it would just go towards repaying debts" argument I've seen so frequently used against the concept of giving money back to the taxpayers. I'd argue that the instant a man gets out from underneath their debt, that IS the truest and best stimulus the economy could ever have. Then instead of paying ever growing portions of his take home paycheck on revolving door, interest rate riddled debt, he can use a higher portion of his income to purchase real physical goods... Those real physical goods are the true backbone of the grassroots economy in this nation. Paying back debts owed to banks may 'stimulate' a handfull of people, the bank tellers, the marketing staff, the bank director, and the bank board... but purchasing a Made in the USA fleece pullover, for example, stimulates the rancher who raised the sheep, the feed company which sold the rancher the grain to feed the sheep, the farmer who grew the grain which was sold to the rancher who raised the sheep, the man who sheared the wool, the people working in the plant who washed the wool and turned it into thread, the plant that turned the thread into a pullover, the company which made the zipper and the hoodie cord, the store which sold the pullover, and the girl working the counter inside the retail outlet where you bought it.

The real answer to our economy and our prosperity isn't found inside a Wells Fargo board room where people with fancy tastes discuss unhumorous cartoons in todays "New Yorker" magazine. The real answer is found in a 250 year old child's nursey rhyme.



This is the house that Jack built.

This is the malt that lay in the house that Jack built.
This is the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cat that killed the rat
That ate the malt that lay in the house that Jack built.
This is the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the maiden all forlorn
That milked the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the man all tattered and torn
That kissed the maiden all forlorn
That milked the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the priest all shaven and shorn
That married the man all tattered and torn
That kissed the maiden all forlorn
That milked the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cock that crowed in the morn
That waked the priest all shaven and shorn
That married the man all tattered and torn
That kissed the maiden all forlorn
That milked the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the farmer sowing his corn
That kept the cock that crowed in the morn
That waked the priest all shaven and shorn
That married the man all tattered and torn
That kissed the maiden all forlorn
That milked the cow with the crumpled horn
That tossed the dog that worried the cat
That killed the rat that ate the malt
That lay in the house that Jack built.


Get people out from under their debt owed to a handfull of banking tycoons and suddenly they can afford to start putting some cheese in their freshly built house and making a real impact and change from the home builder all the way back to the farmer that grows the grain. That's stimulus, and notice it doesn't say the Maiden used a bucket stamped "Made in China" to milk the cow nor were the man's tattered and torn clothese emblazoned with "Hecho en Mexico."



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
We cannot afford this, no matter who it goes to.

This economic stimulus is just going to pump more money into the system that we don't have.

Why does people in this country feel that it's ok to STEAL from the children and grandchildren??

This is the equivalent.

Please don't forget this. Every cent our government is spending right now all has to be paid back...with interest.

Say no to the stimulus, bailouts, and spending.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


We may not be able to afford this....

But I would rather have $9000 in my wallet then trillions in the hands of the very people that created this mess.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by wutone
 





But I would rather have $9000 in my wallet then trillions in the hands of the very people that created this mess.


And where do u think that 9000 is going to go to after u get it? It all ends up back to them in one way or the other.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
And where do u think that 9000 is going to go to after u get it? It all ends up back to them in one way or the other.


Again, playing Devil's advocate for some reason here, at least if it went back into tax payers' hands it could be exchanged for goods and/or services. In other words, you'd get something for your money. When my tax dollars are redistributed to the banks, special interest programs, social welfare, whatever, what am I getting back for my money? The privledge and right to call myself an American citizen? Sh-yeah, that and a buck fifty will buy you a small cup of coffee.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


I definitely understand that. Hell, I'd love to have a check sent to me for that much as well, most of us could certainly use it.

But it will still be money pumped into the system. We are on very shaky ground as it is. Obama is planning another bank bailout bill that is supposed to be announced next week.

It has to end. It HAS to. In a way, the people can be just as much at fault for our economy's problems. We are angry that the banks and CEO's are hording all the cash, but how does us getting this money make us any better than them?

We are falling into a trap, IMO. No matter how u look at this, we are still going to devalue the dollar. We are supporting our own demise.

China is threatening to back out of 30 year treasuries. They don't want to finance our debt anymore. So we are taxed, or it's printed.

It's time to take the lumps. I feel we are screwed no matter what anyway. We let it all run to far and we are desperate, doing things we shouldn't be doing.

Once again, I can understand how you and others feel this way, I'm just as angry as everyone else about the whole thing.

But I won't support this unless the cost of this package is balanced with spending cuts. If not, I will feel as if i'm selling out my child that will be here soon.

No child deserves what we are about to put on them, yet we are going to do this full well knowing the burdens that they will carry because of our repeated mistakes.

It is sad....sad indeed.

At least I'll be able to look back and say that I didn't support any of what is going on. Although to those who will be paying for it, my words won't mean much.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join