A different type of stimulus:

[Denny Crane!]

This would cost a lot, or at least keep printing presses busy for a while, but how would you like the government to give you £1500 in a cheque for nothing?

This is a form of stimulus and it works in a number of different ways. It would recapitalise banks balance sheets as people pay down their debts, without actually just handing it directly to the banks to top up their balance sheets meaning the banks get money but it eases the lot of the ordinary people at the same time and frees up disposable income. It also increases money being spent in retail and leisure industries giving them a temporary boost.

This was done in Australia to the immense approval of the populace.

Now I am a strict conservative and I generally don't believe in keynsian nonsense and other economic frivolities of the socialists but if there must be money handed out as governments sometimes think they must it should be done like this instead of nepotistically supporting the corporations and it works on every front to recapitalise financial organisations and increases demand through a particularly tough time whilst making the populace more financially secure.

I mean giving it directly to the banks to recapitalise just handed them money and still left us in debt. Is this stupidly naive or more sensible?

[Condottiere 40K]

The Japanese experiment found that the amount was added to the savings account; I suppose the more consumerist West would spend it. If that is the case, it should be large enough to make an impact, and small enough to be affordable to the government. I'd time for Christmas sales.

[Denny Crane!]

The Japanese experiment found that the amount was added to the savings account; I suppose the more consumerist West would spend it. If that is the case, it should be large enough to make an impact, and small enough to be affordable to the government. I'd time for Christmas sales.

There was a survey done and most people said they'd pay down debts. I'd imagine somewhere like Germany you would be right and that would happen in the UK it wouldn't I suspect.

[Nietzsche]

There was a survey done and most people said they'd pay down debts. I'd imagine somewhere like Germany you would be right and that would happen in the UK it wouldn't I suspect.

Bush did that. We still slid into the abyss. The stimulus wasn't Denny. It was a giant payoff to Obama's friends, cronies, unions, lackeys, and contributors. He should be jailed for embezzlement.

We're in a depression. The best thing we can do now is civil war. If we adequately reduce the population and increase the scarcity of skilled labor I think we should bounce back. Remember the Bubonic Plague?

Remember the 300 years it took to recover? (Though I do appreciate your outside-the-box thinking)

[saglam2000]

Depends on the populations marginal propensity to consume. If the population likes to save then the money goes under their bed. If it's like America with a .9 rate (90 cents of a dollar earned is spent) then that check would be pretty useful. But in recent years America's MPC has already gone down and this has already been done.

[Denny Crane!]

Depends on the populations marginal propensity to consume. If the population likes to save then the money goes under their bed. If it's like America with a .9 rate (90 cents of a dollar earned is spent) then that check would be pretty useful. But in recent years America's MPC has already gone down and this has already been done.

The present trend in the UK is to deleverage debt or spend in retail so it would have the double/treble/quadruple whammy effect of:

-Reducing peoples debt levels

-increasing disposable income through less debt stimulating demand and supporting retail

-recapitalising banks through loans and mortgage payments

- and supporting retail and leisure (and thus jobs and growth)

[The excited one]

i got my 900 AUD in Australia like few years ago..... i use them all to.......... let me think............. OH yeah on an i phone as well as my groceries for the month....... nice stimulus i would say......... and also by giving the money to the "people" like me they will just spend it (not paying debt since it way too small) and thus create a multiplier effect (a.k.a gives the producers income and thus the producers will use the money that is giving by me and spend it and so on...........) interesting thing i learn when i study economics...........

but there's a catch if people spend the money on foreign made goods then the multiplier effect will be gone to some where else like china so this money giving thing might only work if the people uses the money to buy Australian made goods (which is expensive) so i use the money to buy Australian made produce instead (mmmmmm........nice juicy oranges) and also another catch it what Condottiere 40K say that some of the money will be saved in the banking system thus the government will be like giving the money to the banks in-directly via by the people.......

i know it sounds heretical for you Denny Crane! and you may go to Australia and try to burn be for being a heretic but it seems to be working quite well generally for me for a short-term and btw it also secure the votes for the politician who announce this idea in the first place............

[Enemy of the State]

Yay inflation.

i got my 900 AUD in Australia like few years ago..... i use them all to.......... let me think............. OH yeah on an i phone as well as my groceries for the month....... nice stimulus i would say......... and also by giving the money to the "people" like me they will just spend it (not paying debt since it way too small) and thus create a multiplier effect (a.k.a gives the producers income and thus the producers will use the money that is giving by me and spend it and so on...........) interesting thing i learn when i study economics...........

Broken window fallacy. The government actually has nothing, this money would have to be first taken out of the economy. What you see is indeed people getting money and spending it, giving some producers more money. What you don't see is the money some people now don't have and can't spend. You have no idea what kind of potentially productive projects are now cancelled because of this.

[The excited one]

Yay inflation.

Broken window fallacy. The government actually has nothing, this money would have to be first taken out of the economy. What you see is indeed people getting money and spending it, giving some producers more money. What you don't see is the money some people now don't have and can't spend. You have no idea what kind of potentially productive projects are now cancelled because of this.

do some eco mate (Estonians these days..........lol)

It didn't work in Australia,but we didn't really need it,it was more a prime minister throwing our money around for a short term popularity boost,he was booted out of office a couple years later btw.It was to give a slow retail sector a boost,which it did for a couple of months but had no long term impact.most of the smart people put it on utility bills and credit cards while most of the young people spent it at the pub or got a TV.

Overall it was a wast of money.

edit:yeah and we have a inflation problem which it didnt help.

yeah so damn true about this point i must agree that it is more of a political move anyway lol

[bushranger]

It didn't work in Australia,but we didn't really need it,it was more a prime minister throwing our money around for a short term popularity boost,he was booted out of office a couple years later btw.It was to give a slow retail sector a boost,which it did for a couple of months but had no long term impact.most of the smart people put it on utility bills and credit cards while most of the young people spent it at the pub or got a TV.

Overall it was a wast of money.

edit:yeah and we have a inflation problem which it didnt help.

[Darkarbiter]

It didn't work in Australia,but we didn't really need it,it was more a prime minister throwing our money around for a short term popularity boost,he was booted out of office a couple years later btw.It was to give a slow retail sector a boost,which it did for a couple of months but had no long term impact.most of the smart people put it on utility bills and credit cards while most of the young people spent it at the pub or got a TV.

Overall it was a wast of money.

edit:yeah and we have a inflation problem which it didnt help.

Yes because that's totally what happened in Australia politics...

Kevin Rudd was quite popular right up until a few months before gillard got in, it was only because of the home insulation plan and the mining tax that he got replaced (well, technically he got replaced due to faction leaders also not liking him, but that's why he became unpopular)

[bushranger]

Yes because that's totally what happened in Australia politics...

Kevin Rudd was quite popular right up until a few months before gillard got in, it was only because of the home insulation plan and the mining tax that he got replaced (well, technically he got replaced due to faction leaders also not liking him, but that's why he became unpopular)

He got replaced because he constantly made populist,half thought out,damn right stupid and nationally damaging policy decisions,just like throwing free money around like a drunken sailer.
Since this thread is about a type of stimulus package and not Australian politics i never went in to that.

[Darkarbiter]

He got replaced because he constantly made populist,half thought out,damn right stupid and nationally damaging policy decisions,just like throwing free money around like a drunken sailer.
Since this thread is about a type of stimulus package and not Australian politics i never went in to that.

If it's not about Australian politics don't even bother making a claim that no one can even attempt to dispute (why a party leader was replaced) without knowing Australian politics.

I don't think anyone except for you said the stimulus was the only reason... in fact I don't think any of the political commentators (or even liberal party members) even mentioned the stimulus around the time of the rise of Gillard.

So if you're going to be a partisan, go ahead, but don't pretend to not be one.

IMO acceptable:
"Stimulus is bad because I said so, stimulus is bad because logical [if in my opinion invalid] argument"
IMO not acceptable
"Stimulus is bad for random esoteric reason only I really know about, stimulus is bad because political leader got replaced here because of it [especially when he didn't and no one here said he did]"

[Denny Crane!]

Enemy of the State I didn't say that stimulus spending was necessarily a good idea that argument is being done to death but unless you've a magic wand the government may well give out money again and this argument is purely about this idea and why not? So if you have an A or B choice between the banks getting it and us getting it, I think we should get it

[bushranger]

Enemy of the State I didn't say that stimulus spending was necessarily a good idea that argument is being done to death but unless you've a magic wand the government may well give out money again and this argument is purely about this idea and why not? So if you have an A or B choice between the banks getting it and us getting it, I think we should get it

Wouldn't spending it on infrastructure be a better way to throw your money away if you really have to?
The sum it would cost to give every American adult $1000 or more would be staggering,and then only the financially sound people would use it the way you suggest,most of the lower class just spend it on fun stuff that they don't usually get the chance to spend money on.

[chamaeleo]

Enemy of the State I didn't say that stimulus spending was necessarily a good idea that argument is being done to death but unless you've a magic wand the government may well give out money again and this argument is purely about this idea and why not? So if you have an A or B choice between the banks getting it and us getting it, I think we should get it

We gave it to the banks...and they sat on it, even awarding their captains with juicy bonuses and retirement packages. Fat lot of good that did the world.

If it had been given to consumers, many would've undoubtedly sat on it too: in their bank accounts, buying gold, expanding their stock portfolios amongst other avenues. Which'd have pretty much the same effect as if we'd given it directly to the bank, except it's actually helping citizens. Trickle-up. And in the event of double-dip, having that extra cushion might buy them some time.

Of course those who shore up their personal debt would help themselves, while their debtors would have more capital to play with. Win-win.

Finally: the spenders would inject a boost to the economy whose cumulative effect might encourage job growth.

Tax money should not be used to subsidize any industry, especially banking. I think refunding those who've been the most greatly impacted is the very best venue.

[Enemy of the State]

We gave it to the banks...and they sat on it, even awarding their captains with juicy bonuses and retirement packages. Fat lot of good that did the world.

If it had been given to consumers, many would've undoubtedly sat on it too: in their bank accounts, buying gold, expanding their stock portfolios amongst other avenues. Which'd have pretty much the same effect as if we'd given it directly to the bank, except it's actually helping citizens. Trickle-up. And in the event of double-dip, having that extra cushion might buy them some time.

Of course those who shore up their personal debt would help themselves, while their debtors would have more capital to play with. Win-win.

Finally: the spenders would inject a boost to the economy whose cumulative effect might encourage job growth.

Tax money should not be used to subsidize any industry, especially banking. I think refunding those who've been the most greatly impacted is the very best venue.

The rich are consumers too. Not saying it was in any way right, the stimulus was a disaster, but I don't like the "Us and them" mentality. Everyone is a consumer.

[SLN445]

I have a feeling i somehow missed out on the cash, cant remember why. Anyways yeh it was pretty much a Political move rather then an Economic one, maby Julia should try it again though i doubt even that would save her.

[Enemy of the State]

do some eco mate (Estonians these days..........lol)

Are you ing kidding me?

I'll say the same to you. Learn some economics that isn't ing retarded. Let me guess, you heard of the multiplier effect from your Keynesian economics teacher in high school and now consider it unquestionably true? Prove me wrong. Show me that the stimulus money isn't taken from the economy first.

[The excited one]

lol enemy of state