Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has come up with an idea that is worth considering . Instead of paying tribute to the ever growing conga line of companies ,states and municipalities going to Washington with their hats out; he thinks that the multi billions of dollars that the giver-ment is planning on doling out should instead go to the people and not to those who have thrown a monkey wrench into the engines of the economy in the first place.

His idea is to suspend FICA and income taxes for two months starting in January 2009.Americans pay over $101 billion in income taxes and another $66.5 billion in FICA taxes each month(representing about 25% of their income in federal taxes, plus another 7.25% for FICA) . Two months' worth is around $332 billion. This would pretty much cover the amt. left that is promised to Wall Street.

The difference in not collecting the taxes for those 2 months as opposed to another give away to the economy would be instantly evident . Consumers would almost instantly recirculate the money into the economy. It is clear that the financial institutions are acting in bad faith . They were supposed to open up the tight credit with the money .Instead they have been hording it ;adding no effective benefit to the economy.

Clearly the investment in the taxpayer is the better investment .

That's a nice idea but not really. The Bush stimulus package of giving $600 to individuals who filed income taxes in 2007 just went for new plasma tv's, etc. and other frivilous stuff and really didn't work that well.

Two months of no FICA taxes won't really do much either. The people who have min wage jobs clearly won't make out like bandits either.

We need to have each American citizen get a minimum of $500,000 each from the giverment and then things will really start happening! Shucks, if they can give a trillion dollars each month for a war nobody wanted/wants why not give it's citizens something they DO want - money with their names on it?

$500,000?? Lol... even at current numbers the highest I have heard as far as money committed amts to about $24,000 .

What Gohmert is proposing is a reversal of what even I, as one of them evil capitalists , would recognize as the largest wealth trasfer upward in our history.

Hate to let you in on the secret ;but it is the frivilous consumers buying the trivial flat screen tvs that drive fuel the economy.

I kind of like Twinkie's approach, even if it's only $24,000. Shucks, anyway you cut it, it's going to be printing press money, and that means we are going to need a lot more of it.

I like the plan in theory but I think the concept of the consumer passing that money back into the economy is a little short sighted because people will be paying off their debt and putting food on the table.The frivolities and extras that boost the economy are a thing of the past.It isn't enough money to build a new home or buy a new car and help those falling markets.
BTW... never heard of the *giver-ment* before ,if you coined this yourself its very catchy! I like it!

Gal I was waiting for someone to identify why Gohmert'd plan was DOA .Thought EXCON would nail it first .

The giver-ment collects real money from taxpayers .The money distrubuted in the current bailout is from the giver-mint .Monopoly money is more real.

Quote:

---

I like the plan in theory but I think the concept of the consumer passing that money back into the economy is a little short sighted because people will be paying off their debt and putting food on the table.

---

Regardless of how they circulate it back into the economy it is still recirculating.. The banks are not using the money as it was intended .

John Batchelor tells of a solidly run bank in Maine that at first was appalled at the idea of taking a bailout . They did not need it and really did not want it.

Quote:

---

When TARP was announced in late September, the Maine bank board's opinion was that it was not for us, we don't need a hand-out, we don't want government interference, we don't like the whole idea of taking tax-payer money. But then they listened to advisers who said that the government was urging everyone to apply, that there was no stigma, that the government would have a light hand, especially since they owned a healthy bank. The application was accepted quickly and soon $26 million showed up in a ribbon. The bank had been unable to make as many loans as it wanted before TARP, because businesses had grown so cautious, reluctant, fearful that expansion will leave them short if the recession depens and lengthens. Now with the $26 million on hand, they can't do more than bank it. My banker source shrugs. "Maybe they're lying to us and the economy is much worse than even the TV says. We can't be sure, so we'll keep it. It's very cheap money. We sold them preferred stock at 5%. We'll buy it back after three years. Cheap money. The only thing is, we aren't allowed to pay our CEO more than $500,000 per year. Not a problem, not close."

I am amazed. Why is Hank Paulson pushing tens of millions to healthy small town banks? This is Downeast Maine. Downeasterners are cagey, dour, penny-pinching, conservative, friendly and suspicious. The bankers think there is something wrong with TARP. I agree and asked my professionals. Aaron Task, Yahoo Finance, writes that TARP is the greatest redistribution of wealth upwards in history. The Feds are shoveling cash into the hands of the already rich.

---

http://johnbatchelorshow.com/jb/2008...nic-boat-deck/

I agree .

It wouldn't pass, because when those that pay 7.5% of their income, 15% for the self employed, and an additional 10 -35 % in income taxes, get used to to 2 months of having an "extra" 17.5% to 42.5% of income, they will realize how much taxes makes a difference, and there will be another Boston Tea Party. The politicians can't let this truth come out.






g&p

The same could be accomplished by getting rid of automatic witholding and having the taxpayer cut a check every quarter for the amt of taxes due. Instant Boston Tea party!!

My last paystub:

Federal Taxes year to date: $3,967.03
FICA: $2,458.75
Medicare: $575.03
State Taxes: $1,834.52

I'd be happy to keep it. I hate paying taxes anyway. And I'd be more than happen to reinvest it in the economy.

After all, what's Unlce Sam going to do with it besides give it to CEO's with their hand out.

I'll take my hand BACK thank you!

And I also want to add, that the only reason why it's that low is because my $6,000 per year health insurance premium is pre tax, as is the 401k, if not for that, who knows how much it would be.

We're about 100 years overdue for a tea party... I hear Boston is pretty this time of year..

Why don't they not charge us any taxes at all for 6 months and in addition give us a tax rebate equal to the amount we spend on goods and services that are made in America.

A more permanent solution would be for the feds to institute a goods and services tax of 7% over and above your local state retail tax and suspend all income taxes; that way those can afford to spend more would pay more in taxes through consumption.

------------------------------

What good is a stimulus package if we continue to buy product that is made in China?

Furthermore, as for the credit crisis, rather than give money to the lenders; why don't the feds put the money towards an interest rate reduction for mortgages and credit cards so that those who are struggling can pay them off.

Quote:

---

more permanent solution would be for the feds to institute a goods and services tax of 7% over and above your local state retail tax and suspend all income taxes; that way those can afford to spend more would pay more in taxes through consumption.

---

Yes ;I 'd sign on to a VAT tax in a second

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yes ;I 'd sign on to a VAT tax in a second

---

But as Fred Thompson pointed out, first you have to repeal the law establishing the IRS, otherwise in the not-too-distant future, some politician will re-instate the IRS ON TOP of any VAT or national sales tax.