AMERICAblog.com

I'm going to take that $300 check and write a big "F.U." on it and send it back to the bastards.
Alexander | 01.24.08 - 11:03 am | #

Gosh John. You sound like an elitist wanker.

Paraphrased: "Don't give money to all those people BELOW me. Give it to me!"
Curt M | 01.24.08 - 11:04 am | #

Lines have to be drawn somewhere, and yes they are artifical.

By the way, if it is so good for the economy to pay out these rebates then why did the government tax these folks in the first place?
tbhull | 01.24.08 - 11:07 am | #

Uh...John, I hate to say this, but someone making $75,000 a year is considered to be upper-class in most of the US.
Bill Braxton | 01.24.08 - 11:09 am | #

Sorry. This just doesn't get me pissed off. $150,000 household income is a lot of money, pretty much regardless of where you live. This is what you have to do to get the money to the bottom of the scale where it needs to be.
Dave from the Lake Effect Zone | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:10 am | #

Oh boo fucking hoo. Give it to the people that need it the most.
Larry | 01.24.08 - 11:10 am | #

Are you kidding?

I don't care where you live, what the hell does a $300 check mean to someone making $75k and up?
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 11:11 am | #

Arghh!

And we get stuck paying the bill.
Bush Bites | 01.24.08 - 11:12 am | #

In the print version of the NYT yesterday on the editorial page there was a little article showing that in the past recessions by the time economic stimulus packages were passed and were obtained by the folks, the recession was already over.
gumboman | 01.24.08 - 11:13 am | #

You have GOT to be kidding me! 75,000 'not poor, not rich'? 75,000 here in Denver is living well for a single, and the _real_ number for couples is 150,000 --- that's doctor salary right there.

John, calm yourself. So, you didn't benefit. That means you make 75,000 or more a year. Here's a hint: ALOT of us who are not poor make less than 75,000 a year. If you're really paying more than 36,000 a year (3,000 a month) for housing, then you probably need to look downwards for your housing needs and consider that you're _not_ the person for whom the stimulus package was intended.

Sorry, dude, I can't feel sorry for you, as you make nearly 3x my household yearly income by yourself.
Jeremy in Denver | 01.24.08 - 11:15 am | #

John.. it is starting to sound like you are seeing the light and realizing the Democratic Party in its current form is not the 'feel good party to belong too'.

Don't forget Jonathan Tasini... he knew the problems of real New Yorkers.. and Global Trade / China issues... and where were you on Primary day when he was challenging Hillary?

I know you remember all too well... the Slicksters played you and all the other Bloggers like a Fiddle.

Glad to see you are waking up.
GregNewYork | 01.24.08 - 11:15 am | #

The last check I got from Bush went back to him in in my income tax the next year. Its all phony.
sid blumenthal | 01.24.08 - 11:15 am | #

IMO, it's not an "us vs. them" situation. It's building safety nets to help the poor into the middle class. I know there is something fundamentally disturbing about people getting a $300 refund who earn too little to even pay taxes in the first place, but in my opinion I would rather the federal government help those that no-one else will over bleeding billions of dollars in a foreign conflict.

The problem as I see it is not that the poor are getting more help, it's like John pointed out, the definition of poor in NYC is not the same thing as what it means to be poor in rural Illinois (where I live). Heck out here you can buy a dilapidated (erm fixer-upper) house for less than 50K...

A complicated issue to be sure, but like I said at the beginning, it's a piece of the pie, not the whole thing.
Blahsay | 01.24.08 - 11:17 am | #

Love you John, but you're off base on this. The government shouldn't be helping the middle class and the rich at all.

Under the plan, I'll be getting $1,200. It'll be nice, but it's not going to change my situation all that much. I should probably take it and give it to a veteran's group or to an organization donating body armor to the troops. We'll see. With a third kid on the way, I'll probably need it myself though, to be honest

But the point is, I didn't need to get this from the government. A married couple making $140k a year with two kids is getting $1,200?!?!? That's foolish. I'm a Democrat, but I'm not a socialist.
KT Monahan | 01.24.08 - 11:17 am | #

".....the Democrats want to help uninsured poor people and kids"

What bullshit!! Let me tell you what this REALLY means! It means that libs want poor people and blacks to be subservient so that they HAVE to depend on the "masta" to help them out meaning of course that those poor souls can't do anything on their own without Big brotha libbies who need to stay in POWER!

It's ALL about libs staying in POWER! No more, no less! Libs DO NOT care about poor people. It's all a con!
San Fran Nan | 01.24.08 - 11:17 am | #

Wow, John, this is some NRO or Red State level wanking right here. "What about MEEEEEE!!!1!"

Really out of character.
NCProsecutor | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #

It's all going to credit cards anyway. This is a handout to big bank~
FOX is State Sponsored TV | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #

Is this satire?
underwhelm, horizontal | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #

Think we got a "rural/urban" divide happening here, or maybe a "Northern/Southern and Parts of Western" divide.

$75k doesn't get you very far in the big city, folks.
Bush Bites | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #

While I don't share your level of disgust, your point is well taken. In this country it is almost a punishment to not be poor or rich. That in no way trivializes what poverty does to a person, I grew up very poor and am quite happy I was able to move out of it, but at some point our politicians need to realize that the middle class are the engine that keeps everything else going, providing the resources to support poverty relief efforts AND providing the consumer base to keep the rich rich.

In this case, however, I suspect the rationale for giving money to poor people has a lot more to do with politicians guessing that they will be more likely to spend the money right away, as opposed to saving it, and that's really the point of the stimulus, to get money into the economy. Even this thinking, however, is very incidious and we should be asking ourselves some hard questions like:

1) Why aren't we encouraging poor people to save instead of expecting them to spend on consumables? I know part of it is that poor people tend to have more debt, but there's also an underlying sentiment IMO that poor people aren't very good at financial management and are more apt to spending. This is a very vicious cycle that seems to merely perpetuate poverty. Maybe we should stop talking poverty relief and start talking poverty cessation, which centers around retraining people in how they approach financial matters, even on small incomes, and providing initial support for them to "reset" their current financial problems to a good state.

2) All of these "stimulus" packages are just a back-door way of giving business tax revenue to help cover their cavalier and damaging business practices.

Anyway, I hope no one was completely caught off guard by this because this move had been telegraphed for a while now. The centerpiece of many of the stimulus packages I've read about, like Hillary Clinton's, revolved around giving some form of one time monetary amount targeted at a certain economic groups. In a way, though, at least this will mean that the crippling cost of providing household heat in winter can be offset a bit (as an aside, is anyone else but me less than proud when they watch those commercials where Chavezs oil company is giving heating oil assistance to the poor? When did we start being the recipients of international poverty relief?).
tlhwraith | 01.24.08 - 11:19 am | #

what the hell does a $300 check mean

Not a hell of a lot when the $100 bill is the new $10...
Money's usually no object for our high-flying, TV-glorified "leaders"...what with wars, special interest contributions and legislator raises an all.
Prezzildent Dyspeptic | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:19 am | #

I want my Chump Money!
My Grandkids and
Great Grandkids can pick
up the tab!
those unborn whiners!
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 11:20 am | #

... and another thing. Now, Michelle Malkin will be able to point to this post and say, "See, liberal bloggers are greeeeeedy!!!"

Way off base here.
NCProsecutor | 01.24.08 - 11:20 am | #

So John,what's your plan? $75,000 is big buck$ last time I checked. So if the price of food is too damn expensive in NY or SF,MOVE, but don't whine about making "only" $75000.
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:20 am | #

I work full time, and make good money for Iowa income, but tens of thousands less than $75,000. I am also going to school, and I have SIX permanent medical conditions. I am constantly paying more and more out of pocket for labs, doctors, and the hospitals. While I certainly do appreciate a little extra help, I wonder what good they think it will do? It only adds to our record defecit which has helped bring the value of the dollar down. We are placing a band-aid on a bullet wound with a tax-cut stimulus package.
Vince in Cedar Rapids | 01.24.08 - 11:20 am | #

Uh. Cool it down dude. You are wrong on this one. And it does not come off well.
tim in boise | 01.24.08 - 11:20 am | #

Wow, John, this blog must be doing pretty well - 75k+ well, it seems.

Those of us living in DC, NYC, SF, etc, working in education or non-profit are surely NOT making 75k+.

Maybe we should go into blogging.

Fuck you, John.
Timothy | 01.24.08 - 11:21 am | #

I understand the frustration; But blame the F'ing GOP and the Prez. They won't "shift the wealth" from the truly rich to the middle class. The Middle Class won't get the rebate so said folks will remain in the same condition. Poorer folks (and I don't know whether $75,000 should be considered poor)need it more because of the repressive effect of inflation and sales tax. I assume the hope would be that those rebate checks will be immediately re-spent into the economy. Middle Class folks have more to get by on right now. And there just isn't enough with the Damn War to go around for anybody else accept the rich. (which includes a lot of congress critters).
txexspeedy | 01.24.08 - 11:21 am | #

Chump Money!

Chump Money from The Chimp!
Prezzildent Dyspeptic | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:21 am | #

Wow! Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something? What is $300 going to do anyway? I would rather give mine to someone who needs it myself.
denise | 01.24.08 - 11:21 am | #

It's all going to credit cards anyway. This is a handout to big bank~
FOX is State Sponsored TV | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #

EXCELLENT POINT !!!!!

I know I'm going to throw it at some credit card debt.
KT Monahan | 01.24.08 - 11:22 am | #

easy easy money
.
.
SINGING TROLL | 01.24.08 - 11:22 am | #

This is the stupidest, most selfish, tripe you have ever posted. Shame on you.

If you make over $75,000 a year, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND BE GRATEFUL, you ignoramus.
John H. Farr | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:23 am | #

They know this money is going to debt. Even the Democrats know this. This is bald faced electioneering bullshit.
FOX is State Sponsored TV | 01.24.08 - 11:23 am | #

Read much Ayn Rand, John?
Indigo | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:23 am | #

Shameless plug:

You know, John Edwards has a plan to help people OUT of poverty...

http://www.johnedwards.com/issue...one- america.pdf
Blahsay | 01.24.08 - 11:24 am | #

tlhwraith | 01.24.08 - 11:19 am |

Frankly, I'm glad to see it. As much aid as we've given to other countries over the years without one damn dime in reciprocation, it's about f*****g time another country stepped up to the plate... Can you ever remember any other country providing financial aid to us? I can't. Only the other way around.... Where were they after 9/11, or after katrina?

That said, I do think that we should be doing a lot more for the poor/middle class in our own backyard.
ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:25 am | #

Finally a glimpse of the Republican you once were...

I'm usually so with you, but this post was just so selfish. $75K is not poor by any stretch.

I hope you have another coffee, realize how childish this rant was, and take it down. You're embarrassing yourself, John.
Brian Watson | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:25 am | #

reality check. $150k household income is not particularly middle class anywhere:

"The San Francisco median household income is $57,833 and the median family income, at $67,809 in 2005, is the third-highest for any large city in the nation"

Mind you, I'm not particularly happy about this stimulus package, no matter how structured. Basically, the government is going to borrow a whole heck of a lot of money in people's names and send some of it to them, in order to try to ameliorate some of the effects of debt.

If you'd rather be the person holding the loan than the person who borrowed it, you should invest your "refund" in TIPS or some such.
chris green | 01.24.08 - 11:25 am | #

ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:25 am | #

Other countries did offer aid, but Bush was too proud to accept it...
Blahsay | 01.24.08 - 11:26 am | #

I don't have a huge problem with the demarcation lines--less than 150K IS middle class in much of America. I have a problem with this whole rebate idea in the first place. It's not a refund, it's a loan, and we're going to have to pay it back eventually since the country is in debt up to it's eyeballs. I'd appreciate it more if our leaders started showing some fiscal responsibility instead of handing out band-aids all the time.
akb | 01.24.08 - 11:26 am | #

Are you kidding? Seriously, is this a joke?? John, if you are so out of touch that you think single people making 75,000 or married people making 150,000 are the "middle," than you are waaaay out of touch. As a fan of the blog, I sincerely hope that was satire.
PJ | 01.24.08 - 11:27 am | #

The rebates are a bad idea irrespective of how they are distributed. Complaining that you didn't get a cut? That's crass.
underwhelm, horizontal | 01.24.08 - 11:27 am | #

It's all going to credit cards anyway. This is a handout to big bank~
FOX is State Sponsored TV | 01.24.08 - 11:18 am | #
-----------------------
Even if everyone took the checks and paid down their credit cards with them, that would increase spending capacity. My take is that this would be the smartest use of this money - paying down the credit cards.
Dave from the Lake Effect Zone | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:27 am | #

$75,000 is not the poverty line in DC. There are lots of us here making considerably less than that, and most of us seem to be surviving. I can't afford a large condo in Dupont or a BMW, but I'm doing fine--I even own a house. Standards in this city are just completely out-of-whack. That said, this whole rebate check thing is a complete gimmick. What waste of money.
KMR | 01.24.08 - 11:27 am | #

So is this merely a $300 rebate for officially-recognized "married" people WITH children? Or single people WITH children and the rest of us are out of luck?

You know I would be satisfied if...for once...when a taxpayer gets a NEGATIVE tax liability for the year, that the remainder is carried over instead of just becoming zero.

Oh well, what the hell. By the end of the day, the rebate will turn into a gift card, with the Repukes proclaiming that it is the poor people's own fault for living in San Francisco or New York or D.C.

As it is, even the usually glam Supremes have been reduced to threadbare ways:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M...h? v=MFrTJL1NeKY

hehehe..couldn't resist
Kevin | 01.24.08 - 11:27 am | #

once again it's the middle class that bears the brunt. oh yeah, what middle class? Weren't we supposed to be killed off by Reagan???
Russ | 01.24.08 - 11:28 am | #

You know these checks they are talking about are not free money. They are sending you an early refund on next year's taxes. Which you will have to account for when you do your taxes.
poppadog | 01.24.08 - 11:28 am | #

Blahsay | 01.24.08 - 11:26 am |

The only one I remember offering anything is Saudi Arabia to NYC, and juliani rejected it... Who else??
ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:28 am | #

My Lord, seriously...is it April 1st?
PJ | 01.24.08 - 11:29 am | #

if poor stupid nobodies rise up there won't be a political party they can join
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 11:29 am | #

I don't know too many people that make more than $75,000. After 10 years of teaching, I barely make $40,000. I think it is stupid to give $300...that doesn't do shit.
Kris | 01.24.08 - 11:30 am | #

John raises an interesting point that effects a lot of our economic and social policies. The definition of poverty, cost of living and income are not adjusted to take geographic differences into account. Part of the problem stems from the complexity of such calculations and the difficulties that would arise from administering programs under such a system.

I worked for a large aerospace company prior to retiring. We were based in the great lakes region. I remember visiting division VP's in Los Angeles and marveling at what little house his money purchased as well as the awful commute he made just to afford that.

I see both sides of the argument. However, geographic differences in living costs is real. It is one reason why labor arbitrage has caused the out sourcing of so much of our jobs overseas.
JMOHR | 01.24.08 - 11:30 am | #

The only one I remember offering anything is Saudi Arabia to NYC, and juliani rejected it... Who else??
ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:28 am | #

I can't speak for 9/11, but after Hurricane Katrina, hundreds of nations offered aid; ranging from food, clothing, tents, etc... to money. George Bush turned it all down, saying we could make do on our own, then proceeded to continue to ignore the plight of that once-great city.
Vince in Cedar Rapids | 01.24.08 - 11:30 am | #

How about this. My household makes less than 150K but since my partner and I can't marry he'll get the rebate and I won't. So even though we live pretty modestly in San Francisco, we're screwed out of half of what we should be entitled to.
PaulDem | 01.24.08 - 11:31 am | #

ms aravosis -

you make over 75K?

are you single? lol!!!

this thread is wonderful -
mother bottom | 01.24.08 - 11:31 am | #

$75k is enough, for most people, even in cities like NYC and DC. Unless, of course, you're living well beyond your means.

Hell, I could buy a decent house, around here in the city of Syracuse, NY, for that kind of money. I could do that on my current salary... of $37k.

Is the arbitrary line fair? No, you're right on that count. $75k in NYC is not the same as $75k in MiddleOfNowhere, Iowa. But in this entire country, and yes that includes NYC and DC, $75k is well above poverty line and well into the mid to upper middle class.
Aaron Knight | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:32 am | #

Awwwwwwwwwwww.

I'm crying big fat crocodile tears for you PaulDem.
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 11:32 am | #

Frankly, I think the whole thing is more public relations than real relief, but look again at the "couples" aspect. Once again, those of us in couple who are not allowed to be married (i.e., gay people) are screwed. If I make 90k and my partner makes 50k, he gets $300 while I get nothing. But if we were married, together we would get $600. Just add it to the list of benefits we are deprived of by not being allowed to marry.
buster | 01.24.08 - 11:33 am | #

If you can't afford to live on $75,000 a year in DC, New York, or SF then you've got a problem. I lived in NYC on less than $40,000 for nine years. If you look at the actual median incomes for the country, no matter where you are, $75,000 is a lot of money.
ted | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:21 am | #

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

Are you people kidding me! I live in NJ, which is supposedly cheaper than NYC, and I know plenty of people who struggle making around 75k. I think you're all missing the REALLY big picture here and that is that the monetary amount being proposed for the stimulus is peanuts no matter how much you make. It's all just a nice little scam so politicians can say they did something and people can run around and spend their little blood money away. Reminds me of when people get all happy about getting income tax returns, not realizing that all they got was a partial return on a loan they had given the fed.

Look, draw an arbitrary line at whatever figure you want, the point is that we should be asking what is the intended effect of such a token jesture. All Bush and company is doing is giving a bail-out to the corporatocracy, one that no one has to justify because it isn't a grant or a tax-cut, it shows up on the books as pure profit.

However, going back to the money thing, sure you can live in a place like NYC making less than 75k, there are homeless people that do it making nothing, but the issue is really about quality of life, isn't it? Most of the working poor people I know get by on what they make, but their misery comes from a sense that they'll never get ahead and that they are working very hard just to stay afloat. From personal experience, that is a horrible feeling, and we as a culture shouldn't use that feeling as some sort of metric as to whether a certain income is too much or not enough. Truth be told, I've lived in several major cities and making 75k it is possible to live, but increasingly even that salary is insufficient to do things like saving for retirement and for emergencies is becoming more difficult. So, yes, those that say you can live on 75k pretty much anywhere are correct, but that's with the underlying assumption that people shouldn't expect a reasonable quality of life and not feel as though they are living from paycheck to paycheck.
tlhwraith | 01.24.08 - 11:33 am | #

Hey, quit giving John a new one. He is just using the rebate to make his point. The Dems for 40+ years have mainly pushed programs for those on the bottom, nothing wrong there. These days now the great middle-class that pays for everything is under attack and yes folks $75,000 ain't shit anymore.
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:34 am | #

You are way off base with this John. I can't believe this is coming from you. My husband and I make less than 75,000 a year and manage just fine. I don't need their stinking rebate and I'm glad they would rather help out the poor than wastrels living in their McMansions who want to go buy a new plasma teevee. I'd much rather see the money go to buying food, utilities, medicine and clothing for the people that otherwise can't afford it. If I get a check, I'll donate it to the local food bank.
Kansas Kitty | 01.24.08 - 11:34 am | #

now would not be a good time for another americablog fundraiser!!! lol!!!

let's open up these books --

love to all.
mother bottom | 01.24.08 - 11:37 am | #

http://idrinkyourmilkshake.com/

I guess it's true...There WILL Be Blood...
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:37 am | #

darn
I was counting on that check to keep me in rolling papers for the next couple of months.
Capt Howdy | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:37 am | #

I have to agree with many of the others on this thread, I just graduated from a good university in Boston, and plan to continue living here. I'll be lucky if I can make even 40k so I think a single person making 75k is pretty well off right now.
Michael | 01.24.08 - 11:38 am | #

Yup, it's nice to see that some bloggers have now achieved the income-sensitivity of the journalistic elites - those who think that their spendy lives have much in common with "normal Americans." Should taxpayers subsidize people who choose to live in Manhattan or San Francisco? I love both those towns, and I've lived in the former. But when real estate got beyond my means I left. The price of that 300 sq. ft. studio in Manhattan can buy a luxurious home in over 90% of America. And, even in terms of cultural resources, many of those places, in this sophisticated and networked age, are competitive with Manhattan and SF (unless you demand opera - ugh!).
Whit | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

Dear John, I'm poor! I make much less than $75,000. Believe me.

I could use the extra money!
Jeff Gannon | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

Yeah John, you really do come off as a whiny asshole in this post. So now we're attacking Dems for favoring poor people??? Christ. No wonder this party has no solidarity.

If you're making $75,000 a year for blogging, you shouldn't be complaining. People in far more taxing and less rewarding positions make a lot less. And yeah, since the point is to get money back in the economy right away, giving it to people who REALLY need it is the best plan of attack.

Geez, maybe we should stop coming to this blog so it makes less ad money and you'll be in the right bracket to get your $300 rebate.

You have a point in that there are different standards of living in different areas, but $75k is plenty of money to get by on, wherever you are Stop blaming your problems on poor people who have it worse. I mean, of all the valid things to attack the dems on... this is NOT one of them.
Adam K. | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

Don't be too hard on John. It is just that people don't realize that $75K and $150K is middle class, and those below are not middle class anymore. That is today's economy. It is a label. The middle class has shrunken down that is why the economy is failing. Poverty is higher. Think about it before if one person in the household was making $50K-$75K that was middle to upper. When you had two incomes you were way up there. Now you have to have two incomes just to be close to the middle unless you have post graduate degree. (i.e. Dr., J.D.). The real upper end of middle class starts at $250 and up. That is why all of Bush's cuts start at around folks making $250K or more.
txexspeedy | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:34 am

I agree (goes without saying) that $75K is pretty good dough, but inflation and ever increasing health ins. premiums (john mentions), + other COL expenses are taking a much bigger bite out of it now than before... Even more so for those making less.... THis shitty little rebate is PR ploy... That's the point of the post. I understand his point about the middle class. We're the ones who keep the economy afloat for the most part...
ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

piggishness
.
smoke | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:39 am | #

dont forget this is the blog that was bashing the attempt to help poor, largely exploited minority, communities deal with the mortgage disaster.
progressiveismness in action.
Capt Howdy | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:40 am | #

It's all about who will spend the money quickly. The poor or lower middle class, studies show, will spend their money on things like TV sets, cameras, computers, etc. While the middle class and upper middle class will hold onto their money or donate it to a charity or church - taking it away from where the government wants it, firmly in the hands of businesses.
No, I won't be getting a check in the mail. I will just pay for others to get theirs.
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:40 am | #

I think we're missing the political ramifications here. McCain, Obama and Hillary will all be expected to vote on this. BUT, Edwards and Huck, Romney and Giuliani get a free ride and can sharpshoot the others no matter which way they vote.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 11:40 am | #

Reid and Pelosi are George Bush's
Poodles.
Their Impeachment is not off the table!
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:40 am | #

If Nancy and Harry approve a package that does not include unemployment compensation and food stamps there is no longer any reason to vote for anybody.
Gorgonzola | 01.24.08 - 11:41 am | #

By re-distributing the debt (aka rebate checks) to lower income people, WalMart will be the big winner. The government should just write one $150 billion dollar check payable to Walmart. That would save printing and mailing costs.
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 11:41 am | #

I think Daniel Plainview has shown himself here at AMERICAblog:

"I see the worst in people. I don't need to look past seeing them to get all I need. I want to rule and never, ever explain myself. I've built my hatreds up over the years, little by little...I can't keep doing this on my own with these... people."
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:41 am | #

Topeka has mansions?
astockton | 01.24.08 - 11:42 am | #

NONE of us should be getting checks. Congress is just getting us all into even more debt. That's somehow supposed to be good for the economy??
Apartment 604 | 01.24.08 - 11:42 am | #

I'm confused. I make roughly $35K in Los Angeles...I consider myself middle income, not poor. Actually, anyone making $75K is UPPER middle class to me. Even though $300 is nothing in all actuality because it will go to bills and not the big ticket items that will help the economy, I don't understand your rant.
woodroad34 | 01.24.08 - 11:42 am | #

tlhwraith:

I agree don't forget about Health Ins. your talking at least $6000 a year for one person unless your employer provides and then it still around $4000.
txexspeedy | 01.24.08 - 11:43 am | #

Aravosis, you sicken me. The poor have been screwed for the last 30 years and you bitch about this?

What a fucking moron...
DR | 01.24.08 - 11:43 am | #

Oh please. I lived in NYC for years and food prices are NOT "outrageous" if you take the trouble to shop like an intelligent person, as opposed to a typical yuppie moron who shops at Whole Foods and eats out or gets their food from takeout every night. Taxpayers are supposed to subsidize THESE idiots?

If you're making $75k or more and you're "struggling" to make ends meet in a a place like NYC or SF, it's because you can't be bothered to manage your finances like an adult. It's the people who make less than $75k--often, sadly, FAR less--who need help right now, not the $5 latte and Sex in the City crowd. And most of the former don't live in big cities, although some do, and they make these cities a better place for it, e.g. artists, teachers, civil servants, etc.

What rarefied world do you live in, John? The "middle class" that you're referring to is the UPPER middle class, which is hardly the most stuggling constituency these days, in case you haven't noticed. And cut back on the $12/lb arugula if you're struggling.
Kovie | 01.24.08 - 11:44 am | #

I think Obama said the other day that it should be 5 or 600$. Sorry, no links. It was on Fox news radio..
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 11:44 am | #

ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 11:28 am | #

Just google foreign aid katrina... (if I find on on sept/11, i'll post it too)

Here is one article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/wor...ina- world_x.htm
Blahsay | 01.24.08 - 11:45 am | #

The only mansion in Topeka that I know of belongs to the people - Gov. Sebelius lives there.
Kansas Kitty | 01.24.08 - 11:45 am | #

Q: What do you call a
Menage a Trois in D.C.?

A: Harry Bush Pelosi
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 11:46 am | #

How is he supposed to spend his summers in Paris with that rebate??

I mean really....how RUDE! We peons live for his pictures of the world...the only way we will see Paris is if John goes and takes pictures for us.
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:46 am | #

That was kind of the point. Get the money to people who need it and will actually SPEND it.

I (luckily) don't need the money, and if they sent it to me I wouldn't spend it anyway. It would go right into savings and not help the economy one little bit.

But, I do think they should be giving checks to retired people living on social security fixed incomes as well as those who are working.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:46 am | #

My heart bleeds for you John. No, really...
Dan Da Man | 01.24.08 - 11:47 am | #

WOW!!! What a read...and how sad that the writer is such a prig today.

I think that the whole notion of rebates at this time is misguided as most of the money will either be placed in savings or used to pay off bills...neither will stir the economic pot. But having said that to rip into the poor and such as the writer of this piece did...well, I thought the GOP hacked into this liberal gay man's blog.
dekerivers | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:47 am | #

"paying down the credit cards."

More like most of it will go to Walmart who will then give it to China to buy more cheap crap.

And hate to break the news to you all - but $75000 in San Francisco is pretty much lower middle class. I make more than that and still can't afford to buy a "market rate" $1.5 million shoebox condo. And half my take-home is gone before I deposit my check thanks to 401k, taxes, another increase in insurance premiums and medical savings deductions.

How about not giving any free money to anyone? It's all a bunch of voo-doo economics anyway.

Joshua Norton | 01.24.08 - 11:47 am | #

I believe the U.S. median for household income is $50,000. To me, that is middle class. I am a retired (disability) math teacher from rural southern Ohio, 20 years of service, and my wife and I only made as much as 50,000 for two years. I am insulted to think an individual making 75,000 a year thinks he has financial difficulties. Do what I did, choose NOT to live in a big city if you want more money in your pocket.
Knockemstiff | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

Whenever you choose to join any group - religious, political etc., you then -- to a greater or lesser extent -- agree to submit to the will of the group and be bound by the group's decisions.

I chose to leave the Democratic party because I saw mounting evidence that the Democrats were simply not acting in my best interest and felt they really did not represent the people they claim to represent.

Consequently, I no longer found myself able to submit to the will of the group. The differences were just too great. These were not small issues I disagreed with them on. These were major policies, positions and approaches to issues. The war in Iraq. The Patriot Act. FISA. Oversight. (The list is actually far, far longer - just ask and I'll glad expand upon it for you).

Further, I no longer believe that the changes needed in the Democratic party will occur from internal forces. At least, not in my lifetime and life it short. I can't wait around for 2 or 3 generations for the kind of change that's needed.

That's how I came to be an independent. Now, I am no longer obligated by this quaint concept of "party unity" to support candidates and positions I don't believe in. I'm quite comfortable not declaring any party affiliation.

And truthfully, the Democrats are much more free without me as well. They are free to ignore me if they think people like me are an insignificant number of the electorate. If they're correct, then I am of little or no consequence. Or, they are free to put forth a candidate that has broad appeal and will attract voters like myself. I am, in sports parlance, a free agent. I need pledge allegiance only to myself. Political parties who want my vote will have to work for it - with policies, candidates, strategies, agendas and qualities of character that make sense to me. Or not.

But either way, it's their choice. And mine as well. Because this is who they are. And this is how they earn it.

.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

Wait. My wife doesn't work. Does that mean we get $300 less? For married couples, do both need to have a paycheck?
KT Monahan | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

I'm supposed to make $75,000 a year to fall within this blog's target audience?
tireiron chef | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

If the minorities knew anything they would have been born white and male and straight. Just like John A.

Silly minorities.
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

I agree that the checks could be indexed to the cost of living in various areas. They could also be indexed to the amount of money people in a particular area get in tax dollars.
Minorities tend to get the shaft on tax dollars for school funding. Thanks to the MAN not giving us healthcare many of us will not collect our full SS benefits. Many illegals have taxes taken out of their check but never get any money back.
I agree Nancy is a Tool, I agree this plan will do nothing to help the economy. I think that by doing nothing we are making things worse.
But commenting on the fairness of these breadcrumb checks is like fighting over your place in line at a food aid place....that has run out of food.
Things Come Undone | 01.24.08 - 11:49 am | #

Since when was the poverty level raised to 75k? And here I thought I was middle class... In my opinion, if we're going to have this stimulus, it should go to folks who earn less than 45k, not 75k.
Alex | 01.24.08 - 11:49 am | #

the real problem with this deal is that it is "supply side" economics, or what Ronald Reagan called "voo doo economics". It doesn't work. What we need are some public works programs like we had during the depression. Improve the infrastructure, and put some people other than Halliburton to work.

BTW I make over $75 K but if I lose my job (I have an interview tomorrow) no piddly check will help. I will have to go on unemployment and COBRA. Last time I looked for a job (while employed) it took me over a year to find one.
Dianne in DC | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:50 am | #

the "give away" isn't a very good idea anyway. It is only going to increase the deficit!!!!

They need to be talking about a jobs program. We need something a whole lot more substantial than a game show solution.
foolme1ns | 01.24.08 - 11:50 am | #

NONE of us should be getting checks. Congress is just getting us all into even more debt. That's somehow supposed to be good for the economy??
Apartment 604 | 01.24.08 - 11:42 am

I couldn't agree more! And, with lower incomes, there's a greater chance a person will spend the money. And, a huge number of lower income people will spend it at WalMart. How is that going to stimulate our economy? The owners of WalMart try to pay workers as little as possible, with almost no healthcare benefits. They'll just take our $150 billion and add it to the their other billions.
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 11:50 am | #

this is the perfect blog and perfect topic to mention ANOTHER wealth transfer -- from folks with kids to folks without. i pay 10% of my income to school tax (yeah i said 10%) because we spend $12K a year per pupil in NJ. if you have just 1 kid in public school you are already sucking $$$ from your childless neighbors and that property tax is great value for you. these per-child rebate schemes are a further insult. will all these kids that i'm supporting (but will never meet) be taking care of me in my twilight years? i would insist on it if i only could.
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:50 am | #

I (luckily) don't need the money, and if they sent it to me I wouldn't spend it anyway. It would go right into savings and not help the economy one little bit.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 11:46 am | #

Now I know why you don't have a name. If you put the money into savings, the bank will loan it to someone who will spend it. That's what banks do.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 11:51 am | #

who would feel better if the funds were taken to the borders and distributed to those poor people who aim to cross to take the jobs 'mericans won't do
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 11:51 am | #

dekerivers, that's not true. Most who receive this money will spend it on wants not needs. The government is banking on that.
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:51 am | #

"Think we got a "rural/urban" divide happening here, or maybe a "Northern/Southern and Parts of Western" divide.

$75k doesn't get you very far in the big city, folks."

Sorry, as a librarian in a large northern city, 75K would get me much further than what I get. Still. the government should take that dough and pay down the deficit.
Mike in the Tundra | 01.24.08 - 11:51 am | #

Here's what Paul Krugman has to say. THIS will get you pissed off:

"If this description is correct, the stimulus bill will be a real disappointment. As I pointed out in an earlier post, economic theory — Milton Friedman’s theory! — suggests that if we want stimulus funds spent, they should go to people in temporary economic difficulty who are likely to be liquidity-constrained. But it appears that most of the measures that would do that — benefits to the unemployed, food stamps, aid to state and local governments — are being bargained away. Even the tax credit is apparently not fully refundable, so those who need it most, and are most likely to spend it, won’t get the full amount.

You can blame the Bush administration, whose hostility to helping those in need is now getting in the way of good economic policy. But I’m also disappointed with the Democratic leadership, for not standing up more forcefully."
Dave from the Lake Effect Zone | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:51 am | #

Wahhhh...I'm going to have to dig into my change jar to pay for my extra-skim latte at the Manhattan Starbucks.

What a terrible, pathetically self-pitying post. You're a joke.
dave p. | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:52 am | #

"Do you think God is going to come down here and save you for being stupid? He doesn't save stupid people..."

TWBB
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:52 am | #

Ummm Realtiy Check?

Worst post ever on americablog!

$75,000 for singles is a damn lot, even in NYC, Boston, LA SF.... I only wish I was making that!

Single WM 25yo living in the city.

I'm getting by fine with my salary, I'd be living REAL easy at $75,000.

Fam's at $150,000 also seems normal for you average run of the mill family. Anyone I know in the Boston suburbs making over $150,000 a year combined is considered rich. I could care less if they have huge debts because they found a ay to outspend that, they didn't need that huge 2 spare bedroom house and 5 acres of land in Weston.
HiO | 01.24.08 - 11:53 am | #

"Do you think God is going to come down here and save you for being stupid? He doesn't save stupid people..."

TWBB
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:52 am |

I just had a vision of Edina from Absolutely Fabulous! hahahaha
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 11:53 am | #

I'm disappointed in you, John. While this may not be the best stimulus, and while middle class people may need more help, the selfishness expressed here is a symptom of our country's overall problem. To straighten out our overall situation, some of us in the middle may need to sacrifice too.
kara | 01.24.08 - 11:54 am | #

Doesn't look like Mr. Aravosis is making a lot of friends here today.

Anyone wondering where their contribution for Ablog 2.0 went?
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 11:54 am | #

EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 11:48 am | #

Well said, Ed. You make a lot of sense.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 11:54 am | #

Donald Trump tip O' the day:

Take your Tax Rebate and BUY
the Real Estate Goldmine/Foreclosures into Profits Course!

Foreclosures represent a unique opportunity in the real estate market because there is the potential to generate a large return on your investment.

Hate your Neighbors?
Throw their ass out of their home,
and buy their house at Auction!
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 11:54 am | #

Anyone wondering where their contribution for Ablog 2.0 went?
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 11:54 am |

I forgot all about that! Where did those contributions go. I haven't seen Ablog 2.0 yet, have you?
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 11:55 am | #

Seriously. You really do come off as a whiny little prick. I personally won't be stimulating the economy with mine. I'll be keeping the wolves at bay for another 3-4 weeks.
TennCarl | 01.24.08 - 11:55 am | #

In terms of Ablog fundraising, the next appeal is going to be a particularly tough sell.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:56 am | #

BTW, unlike John, I don't mind being left out of the rebate. It's not a reward for being comfortable or semi-comfortable. It's a stimulus for the economy. I take Krugman's concerns seriously but I'm not worried about the middle class losing out on a few free dollars.
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:56 am | #

"The Republicans ONLY want to help the rich, and the Democrats ONLY want to help the poor."

Yep Welfare Reform and NAFTA were geared toward the poor.
The poor of FUCKING INDIA!
To be clear NOBODY helps the poor.
NOBODY!
I'm so god damned sick of elitist bullshit from BOTH sides.
Try living like a poor person working minimum wage, no health care, so on.
Try working a real job Janitor or factory even McDonalds.
I bet your shitty assed song changes real quick.
Mike Hunt | 01.24.08 - 11:56 am | #

Busboy said:

If you put the money into savings, the bank will loan it to someone who will spend it. That's what banks do.

True. So maybe the best strategy would be to eliminate the middle man and deposit 150 billion into a savings account at the bank. Then they could lend it out.

Avoids all those unnecessary check printing costs. What do ya think?? Are we on ta somethin' 'ere??

.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 11:56 am | #

"That's because far too often the Democrats don't give a damn about anybody who isn't a minority or starving to death (both valid causes to be sure, but are they the ONLY causes out there?)."

If you believe this, you're even a worse elitist than I thought. The Democrats don't give a damn about "minorities," though obviously you're just like the racist and sexist Republicans you like to criticize, and believe this.
chris doerr | 01.24.08 - 11:57 am | #

Hi, Ed!
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:57 am | #

I'm guessing those arguing that anything above $75,000 is a "lot of money" live in places where that is a lot of money. For others, like myself, who live in big cities like NYC, $75k does not go very far at all. To deny geographic cost of living differences is simply naive and John is absolutely right here. I don't see why the $75,000 threshold can't be adjusted by some cost of living index so that it is applied equally.
Egan Foote | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:58 am | #

wonder what scheme we will have to talk about this time next month when effects of market forces have made even more poor stupefied and anonymous and perhaps more interesting where we will talk
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 11:58 am | #

People who make $75,000 a year are all Repukes who voted for Chimpy twice.

Fuck 'em.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:58 am | #

Hi Karol! This may not be the right thing to say in this particular thread, but we were in Puerto Rico. Vieques is lovely this time of year.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:58 am | #

"Geez, maybe we should stop coming to this blog "

Yes please do. The peasants are revolting.

They certainly are.
marshal | 01.24.08 - 11:59 am | #

"Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people! Your own work, not any possible object of your charity. I'll be glad if men who need it find a better method of living in the house I built, but that's not the motive of my work, nor my reason, nor my reward! My reward, my purpose, my life, is the work itself - my work done my way! Nothing else matters to me!"

Ayn Aravosis (quoted from a postcard she sent from Paris)
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:59 am | #

Doesn't look like Mr. Aravosis is making a lot of friends here today.
Anyone wondering where their contribution for Ablog 2.0 went?
The Other Anon

A few months ago the same type of whine was posted about some proposed financial tax cut to families. Middle class and working class families.
Bitch, bitch, bitch about where his benefit was.
This is what happens when elitist never worked a day in their lives college grads pretend to be rank and file Democrats.
This why you get the Clintons, Reids and Pelosis.
Mike Hunt | 01.24.08 - 11:59 am | #

$$$
.
smoke | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:00 pm | #

The Democrats in Congress - and that includes Hillary and Obama - are all spineless wussies with few exceptions.

One exception is Dennis Kucinich, who will file Articles of Chimpeachment this month.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:00 pm | #

Hi Karol!

It's flippin' cooooooold here!

.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 12:00 pm | #

Re: tlhwraith-
So, yes, those that say you can live on 75k pretty much anywhere are correct, but that's with the underlying assumption that people shouldn't expect a reasonable quality of life and not feel as though they are living from paycheck to paycheck.
--------------------------------------
I totally agree with your statement. While my family is "comfortable" and make enough for necessities and some extras like sports equipment, music/dance lessons, and preschool fees for our kids, we really try to live frugally (after a few very stressful years)compared to many of our neighbors. We eat out as a family of 5, one time a month at a family restaurant such as Red Robin, and the kids are allowed to have McDonalds one time per month. The grocery store bill alone for us is close to $900/month, With milk at $5/gal and 5 gallons a week, everything just adds up. We are lucky to have health insurance($1,200/mo), and have our credit card debt down to $700/mo due to refinancing and a mortgage at $1,700/mo. Utilities run $600/mo and I keep my heat at 67 degrees and a/c at 80 degrees. Every month we are down to the dollar coming in/going out and nothing extra to put into our pocket.

We were told that our generation would be better off than our parents, but I still have the same struggles that my parents had when I and my 4 brothers were growing up.

Still we have very little ready cash saved. Our IRA's are just slowly recuperating after 9/11 and this year my husbands 401K lost 50% of value.

I am one of those people that wake up at 2 am and stress for the next 3 hours about finances. Luckily a bottle of melatonin 60 count only costs $7.00.

I totally realize that we have a lot more than others, and I feel very lucky. But I can't help but wonder that there must be something else that can be done besides a tax rebate check that will come out of your own pocket next year.
CutePolishGirl | 01.24.08 - 12:01 pm | #

I don't mind being left out of the rebate scheme. If I did get a $600 check, it would cost more like $6000 when you factor in the interest on the debt the government is going to have to pay.
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 12:01 pm | #

I have to live on $14,424 a year from my teacher's pension and Social Security (which was cut in half because some pencil pusher at the SS administration said I was "double-dipping" with the other pension and therefore "making too much money".

I am looking forward to a small check since I didn't get mine in 2001. I was late filing that year due to my CPA (filed an extension) having to list my stock portfolio losses of $95,000 which suffered an overall 85% loss after 9/11.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 12:01 pm | #

Hey Hunt!!!

BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS.
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 12:01 pm | #

I live in the Los Angeles basin and I've made less than $25k a year for the past five years. I'll take the check, thankyouverymuch.
Willie Lee | 01.24.08 - 12:02 pm | #

You make more than 75K and you're complaining? I'll remember that next time I see one of those "help me pay some bills so I can keep blogging" solicitations. My single daughter gets along fine on just 36K - has her own apartment (with no roommate to share the rent) and a $275/mo car payment to boot. She'll probably give her $300 to her brother and his wife and child, who are barely getting by on their total income of 36K.
Sharon | 01.24.08 - 12:02 pm | #

Oh poor pitiful you. Give me a break.

The poor need it. You don't. You sound a bit elitist John. At least you have health care, a decent roof over your head and plenty of food to eat.

I'm stunned by your post.
JenD | 01.24.08 - 12:02 pm | #

Damn, Smoke. I wish I'd had that photo at Christmas for the ElfYourself web site!

.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 12:02 pm | #

Hey Hunt!!!

BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS.
The Other Anon

Unlike you my ass is still tight enough that NOTHING blows, or drips, out.
Mike Hunt | 01.24.08 - 12:02 pm | #

So maybe the best strategy would be to eliminate the middle man and deposit 150 billion into a savings account at the bank. Then they could lend it out. Are we on ta somethin' 'ere??.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 11:56 am | #

It would have less of an effect because money put into circulation directly has a multipier effect of about 400% with a secondary boost estimated at 20% each time it changes hands because of the black(cash) market of unreported income.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:03 pm | #

Worst. Post. Ever.
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 12:03 pm | #

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp...6051400806.html

My mistake, it was Bush 41 who called Reagan's supply side "voodoo" economics. Maybe this is another example of Junior trying to prove Poppy wrong?
Dianne in DC | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:03 pm | #

"white and male and straight. Just like John A."

As the great Meat Loaf once sang, two outa three aint bad.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:04 pm | #

"They need to be talking about a jobs program"

I think they need to be talking about rolling back the Bush tax cuts immediately. It's the elephant in the room.
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:04 pm | #

I don't see why the $75,000 threshold can't be adjusted by some cost of living index so that it is applied equally.

That's assuming the $75,000 represents the lower bound, and the amount should be higher in high cost areas.

Frankly, that threshold is too high for the low cost areas in this country, where $75,000 is a lot of money. In which case, the cost-of-living adjustment would be downward for geography, not upward, for better targeting.

oops! That means John still doesn't get his treasury bribe! And it takes that much more tax money paying people to administer the more complex targeted system.

It's a bad idea; the unfairness of the distribution is the least significant of its shortcomings.
underwhelm, horizontal | 01.24.08 - 12:04 pm | #

thlwraith,

If you know a lot of single people in NJ who can't manage to survive on 75K a year, they are just wasting a lot of their money on frivilous spending.

You don't need to spend $4 on a latte, you don't need an expensive car. you don't need to go out to eat all the time, you don't have to go on vacations.... No SINGLE person should have any trouble living on 75K a year. They might WANT to live better or even think they deserve to live better, but they shouldn't starve and should be able to put a roof over their head.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:04 pm | #

What the hell???? So, we're not printing money and handing it over to.... upper middle class taxpayers and this is... bad?
Jake in Milwaukee | 01.24.08 - 12:04 pm | #

NOW I understand why JA believes in compromising away LGBT (yes, I included the T) progress - he can afford to wait for change to come his way...

He's got his.

Its all about sacrificing the perfect for the good - especially when you can afford to wait.

nice.
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:05 pm | #

Unlike you my ass is still tight enough that NOTHING blows, or drips, out.
Mike Hunt

Wait till you get as old as McCain or Fred Thompson. You'll see.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:05 pm | #

"NOTHING blows, or drips, out."

It's because the stick up there forces it all out your mouth.
marshal | 01.24.08 - 12:05 pm | #

nice.
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:05 pm | #

i KNEW that was coming.
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:06 pm | #

$75,000 should be the cutoff point for paying taxes. The first $75,000 would be exempt.

Tax the rich, feed the poor.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:06 pm | #

Isn't that ironic Ed?
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:06 pm | #

I make about $140k, and live in a fairly expensive suburb in CT with my wife (who doesn't have to work because I make plenty) and 3 kids. I don't need the $1200, and John, you don't need the $300. And no NYC single ever, ever, starved to death making over $75k. This post is insulting.
jcp | 01.24.08 - 12:07 pm | #

My general rule is that whenever someone starts talking about dripping asses, it's time to get back to work. Catch y'all later.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:07 pm | #

These stupid Chimpy Checks are just another bribe to make us feel good and forget about the economy.

They are a bandaid which will not stop the economy from having a Chimpy Crash.

This crash is due to de-regulation by the Repukes and unfortunately, too many wussy Dems.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:08 pm | #

CutePolishGirl,

You are comparing the 75K number which is for SINGLE people to your own situation of a family of 5. For you, the number is 150K. And, if you tell me that you can't live comfortably on 150K, there's something wrong with you.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:09 pm | #

Any stimulus package should focus on the poor and the unemployed, not because they spend more, but because they are most in need of help. Yes, when a parent can afford to buy Enfamil, it helps the Enfamil company and no doubt "the economy" too. But let's not throw out the baby with the sensual bubble bath of "stimulus." In any ordinary moral calculus, the baby comes first.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ ba...cs_b_82695.html
musedebussy | 01.24.08 - 12:09 pm | #

Shorter John: "BAAAAAAWWWWW!!!"
4tehlulz | 01.24.08 - 12:11 pm | #

Busboy,

OK, then. If I've got this right, putting the check in the bank would not negate it's effect on the economy -- since it will circulate as loans -- but it would be far less effective than spending it directly?

From my personal perspective, I do not have confidence in my job lasting the year. So I'm trying to save every penny I can right now as a cushion and looking for a position that might be a bit more stable than what I'm doing now.

And while I'd love a new flat screen TV this year, prudence says, put the check in the bank.

.
EdNSted | 01.24.08 - 12:12 pm | #

2007 POVERTY GUIDELINES

For the 48 Contiguous States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam:

100% Poverty Line 125% Poverty Line

2* 13,690 17,112
3 17,170 21,462
4 20,650 25,812
5 24,130 30,162
6 27,610 34,512
7 31,090 38,862
8 34,570 43,212

Add $3,480 for each additional person Add $4,350 for each additional person
*Household Size
txexspeedy | 01.24.08 - 12:13 pm | #

anonymous, we make no where next to $150k- I was just remarking that even people are having tough times even with reasonable salaries.
CutePolishGirl | 01.24.08 - 12:13 pm | #

Should we receive a "rebate", I'll just put it into my child's 529 college savings account. I figure it's his money anyway, since he'll probably be paying the interest on it until the day he dies. I did the same with the $300 they handed out a few years back.
Gary | 01.24.08 - 12:14 pm | #

Damn, how does anyone making $14 to $15 thousand per year afford a computer and more so, internet access. Wow, priorities ?
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:14 pm | #

I agree with most of the others: this is a very insulting post. It gives me a great idea of where John's coming from most of the time, and that doesn't seem like a very pleasant place (although I'm sure it's furnished very nicely).

I don't know where any one gets off calling people making more than $75,000 "in the middle." I'm fairly certain that this is fairly close to the top end of middle. Besides, this is an economic stimulus package . . . the dollars should be given to the people who don't have as much to begin with. They're the ones who will spend it (and thus stimulate the economy), no?
Clancy | 01.24.08 - 12:14 pm | #

Busboy is a fucking asshole. He voted for Chimpy twice and Chimpy caused this whole mess.

The Chimpy Crash is coming. Soon enough we will all be in soup lines and living in Chimpyvilles.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:15 pm | #

All of this is just a short term fix. And truth be told, it has been happening over past 3 decades. Reagan and Clinton have just as much blame as the current administration. This is an interesting perspective on this(the midas touch)
rawdawgbuffalo | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:15 pm | #

Wrong post John!

The outrage about the tax breaks to the rich, I agree.

The outrage because someone making 75K or couples making 150K should be included, I STRONGLY DISAGREE, and one day, I want to be there!
Pennship17 | 01.24.08 - 12:16 pm | #

Mike H. leaves and his post is taken over by CDS.

Either way, we get the same crap.
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 12:16 pm | #

CDS is another Chimpyloving troll who helped cause this mess.

When the shit hits the fan, the Repukes are going to pay.

Torches and pitchforks.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:16 pm | #

Stop whining John--these "poor" getting the rebates are the ones who will spend it, fer crissake. Isn't that what we want?
robtheheartthrob | 01.24.08 - 12:17 pm | #

In any ordinary moral calculus, the baby comes first.
musedebussy | 01.24.08 - 12:09 pm | #

Unless it's still in the womb, of course
Watcher | 01.24.08 - 12:17 pm | #

If you don't want your Chimpy Check, endorse it over to your favorite Democratic candidate.

REAL Democrats only please. Sending the check to Clinton, Reid or Pelosi is just sending it to the Repukes.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:17 pm | #

Personally, I would have made the cutoff $50,000 and I would have sent everyone under that line $1,500 - $2,000.

The idea is to stimulate the economy. If people below $50,000 get an extra $1,500 to $2,000, it will most likely be spent on something that will do that.

$300 is just chump change. If you live in the northeast, it will get you 90 gallons of heating oil -- and will probably go for that for most people. (When I lived in NE, I put 225 gallons in my tank about every three weeks during the winter. Do the math.)
nicho | 01.24.08 - 12:18 pm | #

I'd considered myself lucky & would get a substantial raise if I could earn 1/2 of that $75K!
Since when did those who earn $75K+ become 'middle-class' & where does the poverty level now begin in this country...those earning less than $40K?

This whole thing stinks of classism.
kladinvt | 01.24.08 - 12:18 pm | #

The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 12:16 pm | #

you mean Mike Hunt (notice the homophone). Mike H. makes reasonable comments.
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:18 pm | #

Of course, the cynic might think that a post like this is a way to make people support the Democrats plan...they are the party of the people...elitist whining like this post make it easy to agree that Dems are the party of the blue collar.

How does one make 75-100K running a blog??
patrick | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:19 pm | #

The median income per household member in the U.S. in the year 2006 was $26,036. (source: US Census Bureau). Enjoy your elitist babblings.
PJ | 01.24.08 - 12:19 pm | #

Torches and pitchforks.
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:16 pm | #

Yada, yada, yada... You'll eat your soylent green like the rest of us.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:19 pm | #

Here in the NE, the price of fuel oil is the same or higher than premium gasoline.
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 12:19 pm | #

John,

do you know which percentage of the US population makes individually less than $50K or, as acouple, less than $100K?

My gut feeling, more than 60%.
Pennship17 | 01.24.08 - 12:20 pm | #

The problem is that $300.00 isnt going to be spent purchasing new things and "stimulating the economy". Rather, many people, myself included will simply use it to help pay bills, pay off debts etc. This isnt a stimulous package, its a "feel good" election year measure to cover the fact that the government is basically bailing our the big financial firms that caused this mess in the first place and risking an inflationary rise that will make that $300.00 check evaporate over the long term anyway.
CSP | 01.24.08 - 12:20 pm | #

Sorry Steve.

Yeah. Mike Hunt. Didn't mean to group Mike H. in with the slobering idiot.
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 12:21 pm | #

Totally agree with John.
Democrats in the House only care about extremely poor while everybody else is considered to be like Bill Gates. It is a typical Edwards's campaign - let's talk about poor and not care about anybody else. Forget the fact that all these other people actually pay taxes that help the poor. Oh, no, who cares. Forget that these succesful people who made hard choices, have student loans and so on are the ones who will actually go and buy washer and dryer, or choose to paint their bedroom with these extra money, or do a deck in their house - thus employing the people who need jobs. No, this is not important. What is important to these Democrats is that $300 spent on Nike shoes or at Walmart, where money will still go to China anyway. This is a ridiculous state of affairs in US. People who will actually pay for American jobs will not get anything. Those who will send money to China will get a refund. Could Democrats just shut up then about jobs going away? Ridiculous and stupid.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 12:21 pm | #

Mike Hunt has a homophone?

Is that what he uses to make calls to his closet case Repuke boyfriends CDS and Busboy??
HULK | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:22 pm | #

Ed, I refuse to feel guilty because I make money. You shouldn't either. I am glad you had a good trip. I did, however, miss you.

EnNStead, stay warm, babe.

Hulk, you're a nitwit. Not all people making money are Republicans, and, god knows, not all the poor vote Democrat.
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:24 pm | #

For a momment, John, you sounded that Tom Delay!

Ouch!

Sorry, it is just a joke.

For your history of posting, I assume that you have a good heart. But this posting went completely out of the mark.
Pennship17 | 01.24.08 - 12:24 pm | #

CSP | 01.24.08 - 12:20 pm |
"The problem is that $300.00 isnt going to be spent purchasing new things and "stimulating the economy"." - that will be a case with people making under 50K. The rest will probably spend it on little things, like updating their houses, buying new appliances and so on. While 300 per person will not maek a huge investment for people making over 75K, it makes perfect sense to spend these extra money on things they would want. Like computers, or TVs or something for houisehold - all the items that create jobs. I do not think Walmart will pay its workers a cent more becayse of that 300 people will maybe spend there.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 12:25 pm | #

Woohoo... I qualify for my income for 2007...

THE only reason is that I was on short term disability following major surgery for cancer and off work for 3 months. If they used my 2006 income I would NOT qualify..... now my puny $300 will pay towards the $5,000 medical bills above and beyond what my insurance paid.
katymine | 01.24.08 - 12:26 pm | #

The number of us in the middle keeps shrinking and shrinking so what will there be left to screw anymore, John? Oh, bell curve, bell curve, wherefore art thou?
naschkatze | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:27 pm | #

The median income per household member in the U.S. in the year 2006 was $26,036. (source: US Census Bureau). Enjoy your elitist babblings.
PJ | 01.24.08 - 12:19 pm | #

Well, for a family of 3, that's over 75 G's.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:21 pm | #

No, its not--that is only including working household members over 14...

Percentage of Households making over 75,000 TOTAL including ALL WORKERS in the US according to the 2005 census:
26.66%
Welcome to reality
PJ | 01.24.08 - 12:27 pm | #

Simple Solution:
Increase the Taxes on the Billionaires!

If the Billionaires don't like
paying...Tell them to move to China.

All their tax cuts are going to investments in China anyway.
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 12:27 pm | #

My gut feeling, more than 60%.
Pennship17 | 01.24.08 - 12:20 pm | #

55% of individuals earn less than $50K.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Hou...e_United_States
Steve in CNJ | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:28 pm | #

I wish someone had told me that when I graduated in the top quarter of my class that I was in the middle of the pack...lol
PJ | 01.24.08 - 12:29 pm | #

CNN is talking 600 for individuals and 1200 for couples.

Gotta teach a couple classes...later
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:30 pm | #

Hubby and I OWE the feds and the state back taxes with '07 taxes on the way. We work too hard and we never pumped out tax deductions so we are absolutely screwed EVERY YEAR. Our check will go to our past due tax bills! THE REPUKES AND THE PUSSY DEMS CAN ALL GO TO HELL!
Lippygirl | 01.24.08 - 12:30 pm | #

What I want to know is whether the 2008 "rebate" checks will be like the 2001 tax "rebates" (remember those?), which were actually just advance refunds of 2001 taxes. If there is a line item on the 1040s for 2008, we'll know they weren't rebates.
Sharon | 01.24.08 - 12:30 pm | #

If the Billionaires don't like
paying...Tell them to move to China.
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 12:27 pm | #

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
What if they take the jobs they create to China also....Oops I forgot, they're already doing that, and one reason is the high taxes they need to pay to do business in the USA. So, what the hell, let's just drive all of them out....we can always go back to farming.
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:30 pm | #

26.66%
Welcome to reality
PJ | 01.24.08 - 12:27 pm | #

I'd say that looks great!
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:31 pm | #

I totally agree with your statement. While my family is "comfortable" and make enough for necessities and some extras like sports equipment, music/dance lessons, and preschool fees for our kids, we really try to live frugally (after a few very stressful years)compared to many of our neighbors. We eat out as a family of 5, one time a month at a family restaurant such as Red Robin, and the kids are allowed to have McDonalds one time per month. The grocery store bill alone for us is close to $900/month, With milk at $5/gal and 5 gallons a week, everything just adds up. We are lucky to have health insurance($1,200/mo), and have our credit card debt down to $700/mo due to refinancing and a mortgage at $1,700/mo. Utilities run $600/mo and I keep my heat at 67 degrees and a/c at 80 degrees. Every month we are down to the dollar coming in/going out and nothing extra to put into our pocket.

We were told that our generation would be better off than our parents, but I still have the same struggles that my parents had when I and my 4 brothers were growing up.
-------------------------------------

You have problems because neither you or your parents knew when to stop popping out kids.

This plan is a joke, our "leaders" are a joke.
me | 01.24.08 - 12:32 pm | #

Hulk, you're a nitwit. Not all people making money are Republicans, and, god knows, not all the poor vote Democrat.
An American Karol | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:24 pm | #

YOU HAVE MADE YOUR POSITION THAT TROOP DEATHS ARE OKAY AS LONG AS YOU GET YOURS

PERFECTLY CLEAR

MANY TIMES

YOU ARE A HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE PERSON
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:32 pm | #

if the imagined middle class suffers to relieve the suffering of the poor maybe they could consider lobbying the government to ease their pain by actually taxing the rich
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 12:32 pm | #

Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:32 pm | #

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
HUH ?
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:34 pm | #

It's probably for the best that you don't get $300 because they are just going to make you pay it back next year anyway. It's merely a loan and I don't need Bush to loan me my own money. But your point is well taken that it is somewhat ridiculous to not take into account the cost of living for the area you reside in. But seriously, if $300 is going to make a big impact for someone, then they need it far more than I do.

What I'm tired of personally is the extra money people keep getting for having kids. Don't get me wrong, I like kids, but the decision to have them should be made once you can actually afford to have them. I understand that sometimes you fall on hard times and need help. That's what the various government programs are there for, to help you when you need it. But I'm tired of people getting tax breaks I don't get just because they decided to have kids.
Bruce | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:34 pm | #

I think this complaint's really misguided. I'm over those limits, and a $1200 check'd just go to paying down debt, or buying something (although I'd probably try to do something labor-intensive, like a yard cleanup or an electrical project so the money stays local).

Reports are, though, that part of the deal is a dramatic raising of what constitutes a conforming mortgage. I live in San Francisco so (a) I make more than the limit, and (b) I have a jumbo mortgage and a not-so-jumbo house.

It'd save me a lot more than $1200 to refi to a conforming rate.
__ | 01.24.08 - 12:35 pm | #

I've been reading Americablog for about a year and this is my first post. This is the worst post I've ever seen.

Definitely knocks my respect for Aravosis down several pegs.
Aaron | 01.24.08 - 12:35 pm | #

Sounds to me like the next time John is grubbing for money for this site, he should consider a pay-cut for himself instead. Lets face it, if he is making over 75K a year writing this blog....HE IS OVER PAID!

ANd let's not even get into his hatred of children. Face it John, when my kid becomes an adult, she will be paying taxes to support you while having to care for her mother and me. WIll that be fair to her?

This is why I stopped supporting gay issues in 2000, thanks Log Cabin Repugs! It just proves my theory that most of the yelling for gay rights is about the legitimization of the last of the marginalized white males and not about equality, freedom or understanding.

Give gays full rights and you will have a lot more "conservative" a-holes to deal with.
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:36 pm | #

No, its not--that is only including working household members over 14...

Percentage of Households making over 75,000 TOTAL including ALL WORKERS in the US according to the 2005 census:
26.66%
Welcome to reality
PJ | 01.24.08 -
------------------------------------

if you are going to post these numbers, please post the numbers that are relevant to the discussion.

the numbers are 75K for a SINGLE person and 150K for a married couple. You shouldn't be comparing to te number of families making more than 75K, compare to the number of families making 150K
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:36 pm | #

Aaron | 01.24.08 - 12:35 pm |

Why? Because you are not making 75K and want everybody to feel sorry for you?
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 12:36 pm | #

ANd let's not even get into his hatred of children. Face it John, when my kid becomes an adult, she will be paying taxes to support you while having to care for her mother and me. WIll that be fair to her?

Just like John and the rest of us our doing for our parents' generation now. Think before you post.
Bruce | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:38 pm | #

compassion has no dollar value
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 12:39 pm | #

HUH ?
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:34 pm | #

MANY MANY TIMES, KAROLOONATICPRIMADONNA
HAS STATED THAT THE CONTINUED PRESENCE IN IRAQ AND THE RESULTING TROOP DEATHS, IS JUSTIFIED TO MAINTAIN HER FAT-ASS STANDARD OF LIVING
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:39 pm | #

This is a $13 trillion economy wounded by successive body blows. It will take a lot to get it turned around. Consider the last recession after the collapse of the dot-com bubble and the shock of 9/11. The Fed lowered interest rates to the lowest levels in memory; Bush racked up record deficits with massive top-end tax cuts and increased spending on the military and homeland security; Chinese and Japanese central bankers lent the money needed to prop up the dollar and limit inflation - and still we witnessed a slow recovery in which employment as a percentage of the population and income never returned to pre-recession levels.

Now the economy is weaker, the damage more serious, and the Chinese and Japanese more sober. It is going to take heavy lifting to get this economy moving again.
It's the Recession, Stupid
http://ourfuture.org/blog-entry/...ecession- stupid
musedebussy | 01.24.08 - 12:39 pm | #

I'm one of those in the middle who is getting screwed once again.

I'm so over the current Dems big time - I have been, especially when those wimps, Pelosi & Reid, took over the "leadership" roles. Hope they rot!
FunMe | 01.24.08 - 12:40 pm | #

It just proves my theory that most of the yelling for gay rights is about the legitimization of the last of the marginalized white males and not about equality, freedom or understanding.

Give gays full rights and you will have a lot more "conservative" a-holes to deal with.
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:36 pm | #

That's deep.

I can see China!
DaygoFreak | 01.24.08 - 12:41 pm | #

Does any body know if that Iraq
war thing is still going on?

Do those wounded soldiers get a rebate?

Because, if you really look at it
they have half a skull left, no arms or legs, so their not really working if you know what i mean.

Again, Does any body know if that Iraq
war thing is still going on?

God bliss America!
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 12:41 pm | #

Definitely knocks my respect for Aravosis down several pegs.
Aaron | 01.24.08 - 12:35 pm | #

So you don't think John has a point? What if you knew that he made less than 75,000 per year and wrote the same blogpost?

Where would you be then?

Give a poor man money and he spends it. Give a rich man money and he invests it.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:41 pm | #

Probably true, the $300 will do nothing for me or the rest of the middle class.

Is this "stimulus" package really going to pump new life in the economy? Is it really?
FunMe | 01.24.08 - 12:42 pm | #

No, it's just red meat. A freakin bone more like.
Lippygirl | 01.24.08 - 12:44 pm | #

Is this "stimulus" package really going to pump new life in the economy? Is it really?
FunMe | 01.24.08 - 12:42 pm | #

I'm going to buy a new truck :)
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:45 pm | #

That means that if you make $75,000 or more a year, no check for you. Forget that fact that you live in NYC or DC or San Francisco, where prices from property to food are outrageous. No, forget that. Some guy living in a mansion in Topeka making $74,999 a year will get his little gift from the US Treasury and you, living in NYC making $75,001 out of a 300 sq ft studio apartment will get nothing. How about my friend who bought an entire house in Baltimore for $275,000 when that would get you a very small studio in DC. I know someone who got an entire house in Ohio for $2000 a month when that would get you a one-bedroom apartment in DC. I have a friend who moved to North Carolina and got offered a bit over $75k a year. He said it was a king's ransom in NC. In DC, well, again, keep checking out those studios. And another friend has a 900 sq ft condo, and paid more for it than another friend's parents paid for their 6000 sq ft house.

Thank you, John. Thank you, thank you, thank you. My husband and I live in Boston. We chose to live in the city and walk to work, so we can not rely on automobiles and spend our lives in gridlock traffic. $75K a person as "middle class" in Boston? Don't make me laugh.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 12:45 pm | #

I see Johnny and Karol have resorted to the republican sides of their rusted hearts. Not surprised!

Remember their words as we move forward. They're Edwards supporters too. Now we know why. How's your hedge funds?
JayL.B. | 01.24.08 - 12:45 pm | #

I cannot figure out why no one (I mean "few") have figured this out. You are absolutely correct -- and I know. I grew up in Oklahoma, where $30,000 meant you were rich. (And even today, $50K does.) Now I live in Sacramento -- not San Francisco, but also not 80% of the rest of the country, either.

It's obvious WHY they do this: their base (both GOP and Dems) is this type of person/town. They will get many more votes from those living in cheaper areas than in higher-priced areas.

I am ready to just forget all of them. All this time, I thought those who didn't vote were fools. Seems they are the smart ones.
shell5960w | 01.24.08 - 12:47 pm | #

I don't agree with John here either but he is not alone, I hear people make the very same point everyday.
Lippygirl | 01.24.08 - 12:47 pm | #

Why don't the propose something that will not really be a "hardship": get rid of tax rebates for the rich!

It's that simple:

The tax reductions for the rich have NOT trickled down. It's a failed policy. So reverse it and the economy will avoid a titanic.

Oh wait! I have another idea. And it's simple too. How about ENDING THE WAR?

That sure will reduce our government expense and bring that money home to spend in the great USA.
FunMe | 01.24.08 - 12:48 pm | #

They have turned us against each other so that we don't go after them. Oldest trick in the book and even the best of us fall for it.
Lippygirl | 01.24.08 - 12:48 pm | #

We call, e-mail, write our reps
in Congress, Senate to call for this and that.....
I suggest we call, e-mail, write our reps in Congress, Senate to stick
this phoney REBATE right up Their
BIG GREEDY, SELL OUT, OFF THE TABLE,
TAX CUT, BUSH KISSING, TRAITOR ASS!
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 12:49 pm | #

Stop telling me I'm rich. Please. I get so tired of people saying to me, "you'd be wealthy in Omaha." Guess what? My job doesn't EXIST in Omaha or Topeka or Boise or Charlotte. So when people say, "if you don't like the cost of living, just move," I basically tell them to piss off.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 12:50 pm | #

That's kinda' funny...
If I made $75,000 in one year that would be pretty effing good.
Would you folks like some cheese with your whine?
Steve
PS: Oh and bite me.
Steve | 01.24.08 - 12:50 pm | #

I make less than 75K and recently made a move to new job, so my $300 will go to knock the crap out of the credit card debt I incurred moving.

So I guess the only thing I will be stimulating is the credit card company and not in the way they would really like.
j swift | 01.24.08 - 12:51 pm | #

Sign John, your adorable but sometimes I just shake my head but we can't all be perfect.

I bet their thinking was that the lower middle class and middle class could sure use this money since they have the worst tax/total income ratio.

Don't sound like a republican now.
EJ | 01.24.08 - 12:51 pm | #

I didn't realize it was impossible for me to live successfully in a top tier city for $32K. How foolish I was.

This pissy sense of entitlement is almost as bad as John's 'R TRANNIEZ HUMAN!?! LOL!!!' blitz.
DrNick | 01.24.08 - 12:52 pm | #

As a DC resident making WAY more than the $75/$150K ceiling, I can attest that the Cost of Living here is absurd.

That said, John's post is where I get off the bus with this blog. Bitching about not getting the same $1600 government handout as others (when just 2 weeks ago NOBODY was expecting anyhandout) is just really bad form. Embarrassing.
JayTee | 01.24.08 - 12:52 pm | #

$150k for a family in NY Metro area doesn't get you very far, at all. Try buying your first home here on that. It's near impossible unless prices come down or you play the adjustable rate mortgage game. People in this salary range pay the most in taxes and never get anything in return for it.
Jersey Girl | 01.24.08 - 12:53 pm | #

If you make 75000 a year why the fuck do you need a tax rebate???

I make 16k a year! I NEED THE MONEY!

If you're making 75000/yr and complaining I've got two words for you:
FUCK YOU!
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm | #

That sure will reduce our government expense and bring that money home to spend in the great USA.
FunMe | 01.24.08 - 12:48 pm | #

I have an even better idea. Let's drill off the coast of CA and FL and in ANWR and build some nuke plants. That way we won't be sending 15 billion dollars a month to Islamic radical potentates and Hugo Chavez for oil...
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm | #

OK, the details have come out now and you can all calm down...
-----------------------------------
Under the deal, aimed at averting a recession in the struggling U.S. economy, individuals would get a maximum rebate of $600 and married couples could get up to $1,200. Individuals with annual incomes above $75,000 in adjusted gross income (AGI) or married couples making $150,000 in AGI would get less depending how high their incomes are above those thresholds
-----------------------------------

So, people making more than &%k or 150K will still get some money, just not the full amount. I will be adjusted based on how MUCH over the limit you make.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/ 20080...VdExfklw3sE1vAI
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm | #

In defense of John, you really do need to consider living expenses when comparing salaries.

I just did a quick online search for apartments in Boston and Omaha. All I looked for was a two-bedroom apartment n the city center.

In Boston, the available rents ranged from $2,100 a month to $5,500 a month. And I'm guessing, very few people here would want to live in the $2,100 units (I speak from experience).

In Omaha, the rents ranged from $425 a month to about $1,000 a month -- and some of the pictures looked pretty spiffy.

$75,000 will go a hell of a lot farther in Omaha than in Boston.

In fact, I moved out of Boston when I looked for an apartment and the only thing I could find in a building I would consider living was $3,000 a month.

When you're plunking down $28,000 to $40,000 a year in rent, that $75,000 disappears pretty fast.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm | #

When you're plunking down $28,000 to $40,000 a year in rent

***
You're a fucking idiot.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:55 pm | #

John, you come off looking very bad in this commentary.
Crying "Help me, help ME, because I live in an overpriced city" just looks like typical baby boomer complaining.

Hate to say it, but this diatribe could have been written by a Republican.
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 12:56 pm | #

If you can't make ends meet on your 75000$ salary where you're living-- MOVE!
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:56 pm | #

I have a master's degree, live in Chicago (not exactly cheap) and have never made more than $48,000 because I work at a non-profit helping African-Americans become the first in their family to go to college.

Man, what a loser I must be for not making $95K.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 12:57 pm | #

This is parody, right, John?

I saw that 75K/150K cap and cheered. No money to the rich who don't need it. I live in Denver, not a cheap place to live by any stretch of the imagination, and my wife and I just crack 100K together. We're pretty darned well-off, compared to most folks we know. I don't know anybody who makes 75K a year who actually needs a $600 check to be in a position to spend and stimulate the economy.

When we get our checks, we'll probably go spend that money right away - we don't need to sock it away, we don't need it to make sure we make the bills each month. We do need to help stimulate the economy.
Jas | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 12:57 pm | #

nicho,

It sounds like you should consider moving to Omaha.

When people make minimum wage and have trouble getting by, isn't the first response they get back from people who are better off, to get a better job, get a second job, get a better education?

So, when people making good money complain about the cost of living, should the lower income people tellthem to MOVE to a location with a lower cost of living?
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:58 pm | #

And don't think this is only about a stupid $300."

I think that sums it up best, you have soooo much money that $300 is stupid whereas someone like me that is a lot of money.

Don't be a part of the liberal elite, in south park they lived i San Fran and smelled their own farts in wine glasses.
EJ | 01.24.08 - 12:59 pm | #

That way we won't be sending 15 billion dollars a month to Islamic radical potentates and Hugo Chavez for oil...
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm |

I don't mind sending money to Hugo.

However, you should do some research before opening your pie hole (fat chance of that).

You'd be surprised just where our oil comes from. Hint: Most of it comes from non-Islamic countries -- unless Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Argentina, Russia, and Brazil have had Islamic revolutions.

The only Islamic country that supplies oil to us in large amounts is the Bush Crime Family supporters (and terrorist enablers) in Saudia Arabia.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:00 pm | #

I make 16k a year! I NEED THE MONEY!

If you're making 75000/yr and complaining I've got two words for you:
FUCK YOU!
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm | #

I know why you're only making 16K... and chances for improvement don't look good.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm | #

nicho,

It sounds like you should consider moving to Omaha.

anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:58 pm |

A. We can't all move to Omaha.

B. It's fucking Omaha, for crying out loud. No sane person lives there if he doesn't absolutely have to.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm | #

John you are a douche. If anyone needs $300, it's people making below $75K. Ask your doorman what he makes, or the janitor, or the Metro worker.
Eric | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm | #

Hey nicho ever hear of OPEC?

Yeah I hear they don't send us any oil at all.... :P

bahahaha
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm | #

John, usually love ya. But here you're off the deep end.

The Stimulus package is bad policy PERIOD. No matter who gets a couple of bills.

It's Mommy kisses on a severed head.
PeskyFly | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm | #

Don't folks who live with the beautiful people in Manhattan, D.C., or San Francisco ALSO earn much higher salaries than folks in the boondocks? We have a town near the Mexican border here where the average income is $7000 a year. Cameron Park, TX didn't even have running water or sewage, and most streets were dusty in summer and muddy in winter. Such vast gaps in salaries shouldn't exist in our land.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm | #

nicho | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm |

Nicho -- yoou live in Boston?
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm | #

The only Islamic country that supplies oil to us in large amounts is the Bush Crime Family supporters (and terrorist enablers) in Saudia Arabia.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:00 pm | #

Oil is fungible. My point is valid. You're a nitpicker. The money is leaving the country.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:03 pm | #

nicho | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm |

Nicho -- yoou live in Boston?
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm |

Used to, but got priced out.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:03 pm | #

OK, the whole argument about moving somewhere cheaper is just absurd. If you move somewhere where the cost of living is cheaper then you will also make less money because employers don't need to pay you as much. Do you get it now???
Bruce | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:03 pm | #

If you can't make ends meet on your 75000$ salary where you're living-- MOVE!
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:56 pm |

What an idiotic suggestion. Then, you'd be making nothing, because you'd have to quit your job, and you'd have trouble making ends meet wherever you move.

My God, this blog site is like fly paper for simpletons.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm |

MY JOB DOESN'T EXIST outside the northeast. How would I get work if I moved? What am I qualified to do? Yes, i love people with such simple answers.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 1:04 pm | #

Oil is fungible. My point is valid. You're a nitpicker. The money is leaving the country.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:03 pm |

No, you made some nasty comments about Muslims and Hugo Chavez and implied that all our money was going directly to them. That was a lie -- not a nit. Or, I guess these days we're referring to lies as "false statements."
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:04 pm | #

nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:02 pm | #

****
You're totally right capt. obvious...that is if you move AWAY FROM YOUR JOB!

Maybe if you move out of the downtown NY high rise and into a smaller suburb and live within your means that 75000 would go farther and you wouldn't have to lose your job.

Moving doesn't mean to Omaha brick head.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:05 pm | #

Used to, but got priced out.
nicho | 01.24.08 - 1:03 pm |

My husband I moved here from DC. I wish we could move somewhere cheaper but we need to go where are jobs are.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 1:05 pm | #

Bruce.
Sure, but the economy is generally scaled to incomes. I think the suggestion is to move to a less trendy hood. Cook at home. Grow fewer orchids. etc.

Problem: You may end up spending more on travel/gas going to work.

Always tradeoffs.

Neither the MOVE nor the MOVING IS STUPID POVs are without merit, given context.
PeskyFly | 01.24.08 - 1:06 pm | #

Maybe if you move out of the downtown NY high rise and into a smaller suburb and live within your means that 75000 would go farther and you wouldn't have to lose your job.

Moving doesn't mean to Omaha brick head.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:05 pm |

Excuse me while I pick myself up from the floor while laughing. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THE NYC suburbs are? ROFL. What a totally assnine, idiotic statement.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 1:06 pm | #

Whereas I think this country has a real problem in ignoring the middle class and the problems it is facing, I believe that "HELPING THE POOR" is a noble place to focus funds for the moment.

Do we need to wake up the establishment about how the last 8 years of Republican dictatorship has ruined the fortunes of all too many of the middle class? Heck YES, but does that mean that helping those making far less is a scam? Surely NO!

John, it is distressing to read your takes on helping the poor, the middle class woes and let's not forget the horror of home ownership and how those who are losing their homes make you livid with anger because (according to you) "they were just stupid".

This is sounding more and more like a right wing blog every day...
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:07 pm | #

Why should the government and tax payers suffer because you can't ask for a raise to cover your cost of living on a 5500$ / month apartment??
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:07 pm | #

I've never posted here before, but this rant compelled me to comment. You are a fucking spoiled rich brat. If you can't live on 75,001 in DC then you need to reconsider you lifestyle choices. There is no place in this country that a single person can't live very comfortably on 75,000.
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:08 pm | #

Who are these people who are so unintelligent that they can't budget correctly with 75 THOUSAND DOLLARS???
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:09 pm | #

And rather than being geared towards helping the economy, they're apparently geared towards redistributing wealth (that would be our wealth) to the poor

Whatever 'wealth' is being supposedly redistributed to the poor, it is a pittance, a mere laughable pittance compared to the wealth that has trickled upward. I mean GET REAL! It will cost us, the middle class, the lower middle class & poor, $750 billion dollars with interest to pay for Bush's tax cuts to the rich - tax cuts that Bush & many repubs would like to make permanent. Today's stimulus package is a joke & would be a joke no matter how the pie was sliced. Bush is just trying to forestall the inevitable & the dems have temporarily remembered what they used to be about: the party who looked out for the poor. But don't worry, in the end the poor will still get theirs: nada as usual as they get ground down & used up to keep the rest of us in clover.
musedebussy | 01.24.08 - 1:09 pm | #

The notion that the Democrats care more about the poor than the middle-class is way off-base. If the Democrats truly cared about the poor, they would have pushed for increases in food stamps, unemployment benefits and other benefits. Instead, they caved, as they most often do. That is my frustration with the Democrats in DC, not that they care more about one group vs. another. If anything, it is not clear enough what the Democrats care for, which is why they feel so weak and are so weak politically.
Michael | 01.24.08 - 1:09 pm | #

. The definition of poverty, cost of living and income are not adjusted to take geographic differences into account. Part of the problem stems from the complexity of such calculations and the difficulties that would arise from administering programs under such a system.

I worked for a large aerospace company prior to retiring. We were based in the great lakes region. I remember visiting division VP's in Los Angeles and marveling at what little house his money purchased as well as the awful commute he made just to afford that.

I see both sides of the argument. However, geographic differences in living costs is real. It is one reason why labor arbitrage has caused the out sourcing of so much of our jobs overseas.
JMOHR | 01.24.08 - 11:30 am | #

---

Agree.
Bush Bites | 01.24.08 - 1:09 pm | #

If $75K is nothing and goes nowhere amid the tony sidewalk cafes and overpriced studios where you live, then why is it SO FRICKIN' IMPORTANT?

I guess your maid gets no tip this month.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 1:10 pm | #

We should be asking why are the people making over 75000/yr getting ANYTHING?
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:10 pm | #

Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:08 pm | #

Please get a name so you can be waterboarded properly. There are already enough anonymi on the blog.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:12 pm | #

RECESSION???????????????????????

What's going on here libs? A few days ago I thought it was the end of the world! You all swore that we are going through a "George Bush recession" (as if any President could cause this!! Wow, what wackos you are!) and that the bottom was going to fall out of the stock market and our economy! And then, oh my God (oh, sorry for using this word!) it rebounded 600 points yesterday and ended UP 300 points and now TODAY it's up again (God forbid! Sorry again!) and the European, etc markets rose also!

What is going on here?? How can this be? You DOOM and GLOOM libs said we are in a horrible "recession"! What happened?????
San Fran Nan | 01.24.08 - 1:12 pm | #

There are people living in NYC that make minimum wage and manage to live there despite these claims of huge COL expenses... but yeah we should cry for those guys making 75000 and living in NYC...makes sense to me....NOT.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:12 pm | #

WE're still in recession idiot...this payoff won't change that.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 1:12 pm | #

There is a REASON why people live in San Francisco rather than Omaha. DUH.

If you mealy-mouths really NEED that $300 in Omaha, have it. And have fun spending it on all the wonderful things to do in Omaha. hahahahaha

Talk about BABIES!
shell5960w | 01.24.08 - 1:13 pm | #

If $75,000 doesn't mean much to you, a $600 rebate check is going to mean even less.

You're making yourself look bad John.
Nagada | 01.24.08 - 1:13 pm | #

A real bad post John....real bad.
David | 01.24.08 - 1:14 pm | #

Doesn't Warren Buffett live in Omaha? Maybe not shelling out $5100 a month for a two bedroom apartment on Connecticut Ave. near the zoo is why he's Warren Buffett and John is complaining about a $300 check.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 1:17 pm | #

As someone who makes UNDER $75,000 and I mean WAAAAAAY under, and who lives in DC, I will gladly take the check.
I liked your blog until I read this post.
StephenGregory | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:18 pm | #

You're way off on this one.

You CHOOSE to live in DC & Paris, you're rich - or living above your means. Tough shite little buckaroo.

$75000 per is actually too high.

The 'middle class' makes between 40 and 60k, as a family, and that's where the bulk of US families are. Of the rest, there's far more on the lower end of the scale than above.

But as many have said before, its all smoke & mirrors, it won't make much difference.
Daniel | 01.24.08 - 1:19 pm | #

Y'know what America calls $75K/yr now? RICH. Not "middle class." Rich.

Time to stop jetting back and forth to Paris, take off the tux, and

Go. See. America. John.
marhsmallow | 01.24.08 - 1:21 pm | #

But Michael, the Democrats did increase the minimum wage!!! It's now $5.85 per hour which into effect July 24, 2007; $6.55 per hour effective July 24, 2008; and to $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:22 pm | #

thursday preying our way out of depression
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 1:22 pm | #

San Fran Nan | 01.24.08 - 1:12 pm | #

--

If you don't think there can be a coming recession and volatility in the stock market at the same time, you are a total idiot.
anon | 01.24.08 - 1:22 pm | #

LOL!! Every once in a while, John, your true self shines through. Once again, this post shows more of yourself than you really should want us to see.
pinky | 01.24.08 - 1:22 pm | #

I know why you're only making 16K... and chances for improvement don't look good.
Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm | #

ROAR !! I bet he's got tat's and a rooster do also.
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:23 pm | #

We all said Bush was and idiot for allowing Tax Cuts during a time of War!
Remember?

Now Bush is giving us these Dog N' Pony Show Bribes/Rebates during a time of War, and we are all salivating and talking about how we are going to spend it!
Who's the idiot(s) now?
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 1:24 pm | #

DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:54 pm |

And what are you gonna do with the money? Pay credit cards that you loaded to buy a TV? Or you will buy some Walmart shi... that will pay Chinese workers? What will you do with the money that will help economy? Because these money are not designed to help YOU. They are designed to help the economy, to help people keep their jobs. And nothing you will spend it on will ensure a person in Detroit will keep his/her job.
So FUCK YOU!
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:24 pm | #

I've been living in New York for almost 7 years (Brooklyn to be specific). My best paying job was at $40,000 and in 2007 I made $21,500. I share a decent sized apartment in a great neighborhood with my partner. Sure, I have credit card debt that I wish I can clear away, and I'm in grad school so my money will eventually disappear to student loans, but I manage to survive here because I have self-control. I choose not to eat out and go grocery shopping and cook my meals, I cut down on discretionary spending and live within my means.

So yes, I aim to make more money later to finally clear my debt and maybe get some new clothes and replace some hand-me down furniture. But I can't afford it at the moment, so I don't waste my time thinking of what I can't have and focus on what I can have. It's all about attitude adjustment, folks. If you buy into the Starbucks-Whole Foods-go-out-every-night-at-$11-a-drink -bars mentality, then yes $75,000 will not go very far. To be fair, that money won't go far if you have kids, but as a single person, it's more than enough
Chris | 01.24.08 - 1:25 pm | #

I am 45. If I could make $75 K for five years, I think I would be able to save enough to retire. I'm not kidding.

Those orchids must be pricey.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 1:25 pm | #

Busboy | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm
===================================

Busboy, this post of yours is truly vulgar. To put others down like this does nothing to further the argument and only attempts to hurt others. Bad choice of tact!
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:26 pm | #

It took me this long to stop laughing.

Bushboy is going to take his $300.00 gift and go buy himself A NEW TRUCK.

Anyone here think this bozo is playing with a full deck?
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

I am 45. If I could make $75 K for five years, I think I would be able to save enough to retire. I'm not kidding.

Those orchids must be pricey.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 1:25 pm | #

---

Now you know why many northerners retire to the south and southwest.

It's not necessarily for the weather.

You cash out the overpriced house and can pretty much live on that for the rest of your life down there.
Bush Bites | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

What Lippygirl said.
Plutocrats divide and conquer.
Long-time Americablog fan here...and oh yeah, I live below the poverty line. Looks like there is an plutocratic ally in Mr. Arovosis with this post. I look forward to the mea-culpa.
Truthdowser | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

John-

Ouch! You are sure taking a hit with this post here. You should have thought twice before posting your rant about only making over $75k per year.. I agree that with inflation and rising oil prices, 75k or even 100k is not what it used to be, but there are vasts number of US citizens trying to get by on much less while raising kids.
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

And rather than being geared towards helping the economy, they're apparently geared towards redistributing wealth (that would be our wealth) to the poor..

Facts to keep you warm on a cold winters day:

The top 1 percent of all taxpayers earned 21.2 percent of all the money that individuals in the country earned in 2005. So one-hundredth of the taxpayers earned one-fifth of all income.

The top 10 percent of taxpayers gobbled up 46.44 percent of all 2005 income. The bottom 50 percent earned just 12.83 percent. The income for the median taxpayer was $30,881, a 2 percent drop from 2000 after inflation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/ 2...in3379624.shtml

In the USA the richest 10% make 15.9 times as much as the poorest 10%, and the richest 20% make 8.4 times as much as the poorest 20%. Among the world's industrialized countries, the U.S. has a very high degree of income inequality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Eco...e_United_States

The top one-tenth of 1 percent of earners in the nation earn about as much as the bottom 40 percent. That is, about 130,000 high-income Americans earn as much as the bottom 120 million Americans combined.
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/.../yourlife/ 24513
musedebussy | 01.24.08 - 1:30 pm | #

Bushboy is going to take his $300.00 gift and go buy himself A NEW TRUCK.

Anyone here think this bozo is playing with a full deck?
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

---

By "new" he means "just dumped by the river."
Bush Bites | 01.24.08 - 1:30 pm | #

Looks like there is an plutocratic ally in Mr. Arovosis with this post. I look forward to the mea-culpa.
Truthdowser | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm | #

You must be new here.
marhsmallow | 01.24.08 - 1:32 pm | #

I have a novel idea: how about the government taking the billions for rebate checks and reinvesting it in US infrastructure to create more jobs and bring back the ones that were moved to India and China.

The only thing a $300 check will do is help the Chinese economy when everybody runs to Walmart and buy Chinese made products.
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:33 pm | #

I'm coming late to the discussion - but have read all the posts and think there is one thing no one has pointed out yet. That is, when you are talking about how much JohnA 'makes' doing ABlog, whether its 75k or not (and I have no idea), just remember that the DONATIONS and/or CONTRIBUTIONS here are GIFTS, that is, NOT earned income, and thus he does not pay taxes on them. If he should, for example, realize 75k from gifts from ABlog readers, all of that is tax-free. (Purchases from the Ablog store not included.)
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 1:33 pm | #

MY JOB DOESN'T EXIST outside the northeast. How would I get work if I moved? What am I qualified to do? Yes, i love people with such simple answers.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08
------------------------------------

I'm sure there are neighborhoods in your area that you could afford to live comfortably in. You just don't like them.

REad the previous post about the guy living in Brooklyn comfortably on much less than 75K
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:34 pm | #

Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:29 pm |

This rebate is not a "below poverty line" help. First, try to understand its purpose and then judge what John says. It is to help the economy, not to help people. Two very different things. A check sent to unemployed person in Alabama does nothing for a worker in Detroit who is about to loose his job. The purpose of rebate is to make sure that guy in Detroit has a job, it is not about poor or rich. Think about it!!!!!
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:34 pm | #

Congress is poised to pass the new FISA wiretapping bill, granting immunity to the companies that helped the President and the NSA shred the Constitution while illegally, warrantlessly wiretapping the nation's phones and Internet traffic. You can stop it.
* Barbara Boxer: (202) 224-3553
* Sherrod Brown: (202) 224-2315
* Russ Feingold: (202) 224-5323
* Ted Kennedy: (202) 224-4543
* Bill Nelson: (202) 224-5274
* Ron Wyden: (202) 224-5244
* Joe Biden: (202) 224-5042
* Hillary Clinton: (202) 224-4451
* John Kerry: (202) 224-2742
* Bob Menendez: (202) 224-2742
* Barack Obama: (202) 224-2854
* Ben Cardin: (202) 224-4524
* Norm Coleman: (202) 224-5641
* Dick Durbin: (202) 224-2152
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 1:35 pm | #

Wow, this screed wouldn't out of place on Townhall or any other right-wing nutjob website. It's a veritable pick and choose of right-wing memes; Redistribution of wealth - check, thinly veiled contempt of minorities - check.

If you'd written this for that GOP senator you used to work for, the party would have loved it!

BTW: what's with the resentment of folks, who live less desirable areas? Housing in DC, NYC & SFO is more expensive because THEY ARE MORE DESIRABLE PLACES TO LIVE! If you are so obessed over people in NC paying so much less, then move there and quit your fucking whining! Why is it the government's responsibility to help alliviate the fact that YOU CHOOSE to live in an expensive location?
John | 01.24.08 - 1:35 pm | #

Boy does this bring back some memories...

Perhaps it's time for another of the vaunted "Left's Fear of Money" diatribes... only this time with a more direct "for me" intonation...

http://www.americablog.com/2006/...ey-part- ii.html

From my personal correspondence with John:
..."As for my trips to Europe and elsewhere, they're none of your business. You don't get to judge how many Twinkies your local newspaper reporter buys at the Safeway, or whether he did or didn't go on a family vacation last year, when deciding whether to pay your newspaper subscription price. You don't look at the personal budget of your employees and then decide their salaries, and you don't look at the personal budget of the head of the ACLU when and if you donate to them. I won't be held to a different standard. You pay someone
their worth, period.

In addition, please do tell me how you paid for my trip to Amsterdam, Scotland and Paris, oh yeah and San Francisco and Miami, since in fact they were all paid for by clients and/or third parties, including airfare and hotel? I'm sorry if I'm good enough at my job to actually find ways to get my trips covered, but the fact that you don't do the same for your family is hardly an indictment of me.

See, that's why comments like yours tick me off. You gratuitously take a public swipe at me in an effort to hurt my bottom line, and you're not even correct in what you're saying. How do you expect someone not to tell you to take a hike?"...

So, the fact he's whining about not receiving a $300 check should hardly considered an indictment of the Democrats in Congress or those that will receive the funds...
Guy | 01.24.08 - 1:36 pm | #

kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 1:35 pm | #

Why would you want to stop it? Do you have a death wish?
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:36 pm | #

I am sure than any job that exists in the Northeast exists in Houston which still have a good economy and housing market. We have page-after-page of jobs begging in our classifieds every week.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:36 pm | #

Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:34 pm | #

WHAT???
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:37 pm | #

Has some wingnut hacked into this site?! At best, as John Cole notes, the original post reads like a spoof. This, along with the excuse-making when it was revealed that Nancy Pelosi was complicit in torture, is quickly pushing Americablog off my daily must-read list.
Mike B. | 01.24.08 - 1:38 pm | #

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:36 pm |

What is your point? If everyone runs to Houston, housing there will jump and you will get the same story all over.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:38 pm | #

I grew up poor and oh what a time it was! Benefits up the wazoo...because the Dems cared so much about us!

Why, oh why did I have to move into the oppressed middle-class?
Rose | 01.24.08 - 1:39 pm | #

Typical CDS response.

Slimy little repuke, scared of his own shadow.

BOOGA_BOOGA, CDS. Quick, run and hide!!
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 1:39 pm | #

This rebate is not a "below poverty line" help. First, try to understand its purpose and then judge what John says. It is to help the economy, not to help people. Two very different things. A check sent to unemployed person in Alabama does nothing for a worker in Detroit who is about to loose his job. The purpose of rebate is to make sure that guy in Detroit has a job, it is not about poor or rich. Think about it!!!!!
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:34
----------------------------------

The point of this "rebate" is to get money into the hands of people who will spend it to help keep the economy going. Consumer spending is what has been keeping us afloat for a long time now. But, consumers have started to cut back now.

Giving money to someone who makes over 75K isn't going to stimulate the economy because they aren't going to spend it. If someone in that income range was going to spend $300 - $600 for something, then they are going to spend that whether they get a check or not. BUt, give that money to someone on the low end and they will spend it. They have no choice, even if it is only used to pay off their credit cards. That means they will have avalable credit to use again later.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:39 pm | #

THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
put on C-Span
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
Call your Senator NOW and support Sen Dodd's fight to save the Constitution
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
Call your Senator NOW and support Sen Dodd's fight to save the Constitution
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
kevkev in Apache Junction | 01.24.08 - 1:40 pm | #

Damn. If someone making over 75K actually needs 600-1200 bucks their fooked!

I make less than that and live in a very expensive part of the country and they can keep my freaking check. I don't need it. Even supporting a family I get by just fine. I'll probably donate it to some poor minority.
Jay | 01.24.08 - 1:40 pm | #

BOOGA_BOOGA, CDS. Quick, run and hide!!
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 1:39 pm | #

Do you and kevkev even know what they are voting on ?
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:41 pm | #

I am saying there are many places in the U.S. that have much lower cost of living, where where a married couple can live below $150K a year. To complain about not making ends meet on $150K means that maybe they are living way above their means and basic needs. We have become a mobile society due to people moving to those places with more opportunity.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:41 pm | #

Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:37 pm |

"Ouch! You are sure taking a hit with this post here. You should have thought twice before posting your rant about only making over $75k per year.. I agree that with inflation and rising oil prices, 75k or even 100k is not what it used to be, but there are vasts number of US citizens trying to get by on much less while raising kids." - you wrote it. Which implies John is wrong by not wanting to help the poor. And my point is that it is not what that rebate was designed to do.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:42 pm | #

Checks going to people making $75,000 and under *misses* the middle class? Maybe that's the perception where you are, but that's most certainly not the prevailing opinion in the rest of the country. People "scraping by" making >$75K while living in cost-of-living nightmares like LA and NYC are the exception, not the rule. Cutoff point have to exist, and those points need to (try to) be applied fairly across the board, not just in the five boroughs. John, your definition of "middle class" is a fabrication.

This is, by FAR, the worst take I've seen from you.
verchiel | 01.24.08 - 1:44 pm | #

I heard Bush's stimulus plan was to create a "splurge" like his "shop until you drop" campaign right after 9/11. Put in the back of the poor consumer to save his bankrupt economy.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:45 pm | #

Oh hooray. Once again, not having kids means I get to subsidize the kind of twits who've managed to raise total brats, bring them everywhere, and ruined damn near every flight, movie, dinner at a nice restaurant, college class, and trip to a bar that I've had in ten years.
a drunk | 01.24.08 - 1:46 pm | #

anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:39 pm |

"Giving money to someone who makes over 75K isn't going to stimulate the economy because they aren't going to spend it" - I see it as totally the opposite. Noone making over 75K would even think about investing these money - it is too little to make any difference. Yet, it is a nice extra income to spend on things that otherwise would wait. And these are the things that keep economy going. Even a simple paint job or backyard work will employ people and create money effect in economy. It is much better than spend in Walmart.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:46 pm | #

Here's what it means.
Instead of meats so lean
It looks like soylent green
For the spoiled queen.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 1:46 pm | #

Seriously John, get over yourself. Try reading this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ame...le_class#Income

There are A LOT of middle class people who will benefit.

And for someone bitching about how the Democrats pander to minority/special interest groups, bear in mind how much time you spend lambasting the Democrats for not following you on gay issues, especially gay marriage, even though it is an election-killer that will only put more right wing Republicans in office.

And this place used to be where I'd come for sanity :(
Max Power | 01.24.08 - 1:47 pm | #

Eric | 01.24.08 - 1:01 pm

umm....metro workers in DC are all unionized and make pretty good salaries.. I wouldn't use them to make your point, or group them with the other 2 occupations you mentioned
ndtovent | 01.24.08 - 1:47 pm | #

Wait a sec... you make over $75K as a f**king blogger? I know someone in DC working for a non-profit, and she's doing fine making considerably less.

I agree with the others: your complaint is way off base.

For what it's worth, the reason they cut checks to the poor instead of to other people (though, in all honesty, $75K hardly qualifies as "poor" anywhere but NYC and DC), as Paul Krugman explained about a week ago, is because most people won't spend it immediately. When middle class and rich people get a momentary bounce in income, especially a fairly small amount, it sits in the bank or goes straight into a savings account, which does nothing for the economy. Those of extremely low liquidity, however, are more likely to spend it immediately. Give all hundred million of them a couple hundred bucks at the same time, and you get a sort of "jump start" effect on the economy.
el ranchero | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:48 pm | #

I totally disagree with you on this one, and I live in San Francisco, and make a couple of bucks over the cap.

I disagree, because this isn't about giving money back to the middle class (which you are, if you are single, and live in SF and make 75K a year). This is a fiscal stimulation package, and giving it to the middle class, who are just going to pay down dept, or bank it, isn't going to stimulate the econmy. There's plenty of hard data that suggests giving it to the lowest incomes results in th biggest direct boost to the the economy.

I generally agree with you on most things, and there is generally a lot to be angry at the democratic party about. But this isn't one of those things.

You want a finely grained fiscal policy that takes into account costs of living, and different amounts of money for different parts of the country, and suddenly your going to end up with a pork filled, politicized package that doesn't do whats its supposed to do. Congress can't write fiscal policy with that level of detail... which is why givebacks to the states should be part of the stimulus package -- that's where and how regional differences can be addressed.

You live in San Francisco, in a small studio. Get over it. You pay a lifestyle tax for living in one of the best cities in the country. Don't want to pay for it? Go live in a bedroom community in the east bay. Houses are going cheap out there. Otherwise, stop acting like a little kid who's throwing a tantrum because his neighbor is getting a bigger allowance. Sorry if this characterization is a bit mean, but you sound like a spoiled kid. Most people who make less then the cap would kill to have your lifestyle, earning power and living situation.

Bottom line, the stimulus package isn't FOR YOU. Its to stimulate the economy overall. It's for all of us, and frankly, I'd prefer to have a functioning economy, rather then $300 in my pocket.

PS sorry for posting this in the Clinton thread
Jeremy Lassen | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:49 pm | #

Dude, I make 70K, live in 600 sq.ft. in Manhattan, and I'm ROLLING IN IT.

The ACTUAL poor can have my check. Make the ceiling 50K, I say.

I pull my weight around here. I'm not bitching. You fucking pussies.
Chris | 01.24.08 - 1:49 pm | #

You've come unhinged John. Seriously, what does a onetime check of $300 do for a person making 85K. I make about that in NYC. I might put it in savings, or go to a nice meal. That's pretty much it. If i need that 300 to survive, i'm not managing my money well.

You really just sounded like a bow-tied gay version of Tucker Carlson...if that wasn't redundant.
chrisnyc | 01.24.08 - 1:50 pm | #

I don't need a stimulus - I"m happy to see it go to the less fortunate.

What pisses me off is bailing out the fucking bankers who got us into this mess. I wish they would just let them all fail already. I hate Citi and JP Morgan and Capital One and the rest of the bastards with a passion. I've used credit unions for over 20 years and don't go near a bank unless I have to.

We need a sane economy and to stop letting all the wealth of it drift to the top.
donna | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 1:51 pm | #

Garbage workers in NYC make $44,441 a year with only a GED needed. After teaching for 15 years in Texas, I got up to nearly $40,000 and that's with 160 undergrad hours and grad school. Here is an article on NY city salaries where bartenders with tips can make as much as $100K.

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/bi.../features/4086/

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:52 pm | #

chrisnyc | 01.24.08 - 1:50 pm |

People here are just plain not-smart. This is not a survival check!!! Get it??? It has nothing to do with help. It is designed to jump start the economy. It is a stupid plan, it will not work, but it is not a "help" refund.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:53 pm | #

Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:42 pm | #

I implied nothing. And your argument doesn't mean squat!
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:53 pm | #

Dear John

We are supposed to feel sorry for you because you live in a studio apartment in one of the most expensive areas of DC, eat out constantly and travel to Paris for vacations several times a year?

The state median income for District of Columbia for a family of four is estimated at $50,000 a year. And remember, that's the median.

This post combined with your rant on the mortgage crisis reveals that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to how most of the country lives, what their issues are or what their struggles are.

Maybe you should rename your blog:

AmericaBlog: the blog for upper middle class, single gay men.
MG | 01.24.08 - 1:53 pm | #

Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:42 pm | #

I said in a later post that this "stimulis" package was a very dumb and ineffectual idea.

It's like giving candy to a whiny baby. It doesn't get to the root causes of our poor economy, which the republicans had much to do.
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:55 pm | #

Anyone who thinks these "stimulus checks" will create more than a blip in the economy needs to roll up their check, set it on fire and stuff it up their ass. They'll get more bang for the buck.
Neal | 01.24.08 - 1:56 pm | #

Thank you, Chris

I have had my wages slashed down to 42,000 a year by my employer (an airline) and my pension stolen. I live in Chicago and I get by. I moved from Michigan Ave to the northwest side of town to cut my costs. Got rid of my phone line, internet and cable TV. You make do. You don't begrudge the poor a lousy $300!

Sweet buttery Jesus! What's wrong with Aravosis!

A few hundred dollars will not make up the corporate greed that has left me making less than I did 11 years ago. But I know some neighbors that could use that money for new warm clothes.

Increasing our national debt is not going to solve this. Can't anyone else see we are being pandered to by the eejits in DC?
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 1:56 pm | #

Sweet buttery Jesus! What's wrong with Aravosis!

LOL!
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:56 pm | #

Donna. We have a branch bank, a Starbucks, and a Walgreens or CVS being built on every corner here (even have Starbucks built across the corner from each other for those times when you don't want to wait for a traffic light). They have to get their money for building somewhere.
CVS even has ATM machines for my bank so I don't have to drive the two miles to their bank, only a mile.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

What happened to the no tax cuts for the rich thing. here they do just that and you complain. Stupid wanker libs.

ROTFLMAO.
Ed Wood | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:55 pm | #

Absolutely agree. I am just trying to make some here to understand that while it is a stupid and useless plan, it has nothing to do with helping people.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

Further, this isn't "my* "rebate check." Does anyone seriously think that this money is really being given back out of last year's taxes? Of course not, it's being printed out of thin air and it will cause inflation while adding to the national debt, thus forcing cuts in government services while taxes remain high as ever.

Why artificially further inflate already-inflated markets like NYC, SF, and LA anyway? All that does is subsidize keeping the cost of living sky-high and it nails the poor (and anyone who tries to save rather than going into debt) to a tree. Think about it.
marhsmallow | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

Our Starbucks is so big it has a mini Starbucks inside.
Bart | 01.24.08 - 1:58 pm | #

Sedoy,

This was my pont... I make more tha 75K per yera. And, if I were to get a check from the govt it wouild go right into my savings. I wouldn't spend it on anything, because I don't need anything right now. And, if I did need something right now, I would buy it without having to get a check from the govt.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:59 pm | #

oh, fuck you, John.

you were wrong on ENDA and you're way wrong on this. Fuck. You.
aspshortjock | 01.24.08 - 1:59 pm | #

Some figures:

Median 2004 houshold income: in DC $46,211; in the entire USA $44,334.

Median 2000 value of owner-occupied housing units: in DC $157,200; in entire US $119,600.

source: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd...ates/ 11000.html

So a couple earning over 3x the median income in DC would get this rebate. A single person earning 162% of the median income in DC gets this rebate. Seems to me clear that:
A. $75,000 for a single person isn't a middle class income in DC.
B. John is being a major whiny ass titty baby over this. If $75k isn't enough to comfortably support himself, he needs to either work harder and make more money, or stop trying to live above his means.
John | 01.24.08 - 1:59 pm | #

I'm going to take my chimpy check and buy $300 worth of Longbottom Leaf.

John, maybe you should sell some of your orchids.
kladinvt | 01.24.08 - 2:00 pm | #

anonymous | 01.24.08 - 1:59 pm |

I disagree. You would not save it because it makes little difference. However, updating your PC might be an idea you would consider. And this is what keeps economy going. Even banking these money is better than spending them at Walmart. In Walmart, it all will go to executives and China because nothing they sell is made here.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 2:01 pm | #

Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 1:57 pm | #

I didn't say John was wrong I just said he was making his audience angry.

OK I gotta get back to work.
Bart | 01.24.08 - 2:02 pm | #

I see that Starbucks is lowering their plain cup of coffee to $1 in order to compete with McDonald's and Dunkin Donuts after the latter beat them in a national blind taste test.

I go to What-a-Burger which gives FREE coffee to senior citizens. I also shop at Kohl's on those two Wednesdays a month when "Seniors" get a 15% discount. When one is on a pension, you clip every coupon, too. I have no credit cards and only pay cash which means I don't get over extended.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 2:02 pm | #

That's because far too often the Democrats don't give a damn about anybody who isn't a minority or starving to death (both valid causes to be sure, but are they the ONLY causes out there?). If you're in the middle, you're on your own.

John, I resent your comment, because there are African-Americans like ME, who are in the 75K a year bracket and will get just as screwed as your friends by this rebate shyt.
The Political Junkie | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:03 pm | #

Deleting this site's bookmark NOW... this post is execrable and shows you have quite a ways to go to grow up.
John H. Farr | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:03 pm | #

Is the cutoff based on adjusted gross income from a previous year's tax return? Or is it the combined wages, salaries and tips number?

My gross income for 2007 was $74,968 and I'm a single mom in NJ. My son's father just passed away and my son will get $1,666 a month in social security survivor benefits until he's 19, if still in school. Not sure where we fit in this rebate scheme, it doesn't matter. We don't need the money. The kid's SS will be banked (and any monies from his father's estate); every cent of it.

Chances are I'll give the rebate check to a neighbor down the street who's stuggling with paying her medical bills fighting uterine cancer and heating her house.
Theresa | 01.24.08 - 2:04 pm | #

This package is being negotiated by Bush and democrats - the democrats who got the minimum wage raised last year for the first time in decades. So it will probably be a half-good-for-the-poor, half-good-for-the-uber-rich thing, as John bemoans.

Health care:
The universal health care thing that would make even your premiums $35-$70 a month, John, is an unusual animal, not like Canada or England's. You should look into them. Hillary's and John E.'s are the same, since he came out with it months before she adopted it, and found favor with it in Iowa. Those plan say that the government will make health insurance companies compete with a government plan, and that the government plan cannot refuse care approved by a doctor. John E.'s would even come with the Patient's Bill of Rights he got passed in congress, and which Bush vetoed, or we wouldn't be dying for lack of cares now. The mandate for all would be, you go to a doctor and instead of paying the $180 you pay the first month's premium of insurance. With all people covered, the premium goes way down. There is more good too. Why not check it out before rejecting it?
FightForYourMind | 01.24.08 - 2:04 pm | #

I thought John Edwards' health plan omitted the insurance companies. --???
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 2:05 pm | #

I'm sorry but in this economy $75,000 is comfortable anywhere. Ok, I AM in Ohio and my $30,000 a year goes fairly far here but seriously, if I made even $50,000 I'd feel like I was living in the lap of luxury, and would gladly give up my share of the rebate to someone making $15,000 or $20,000.
Anastasia | 01.24.08 - 2:06 pm | #

Wow I don't think your post could get any more clueless than this. Yeah if you insist on living in Dupont Circle, only shopping at Whole Foods, I guess 75,000 is rough. If in insisted on living in downtown Austin and only shopping at whole foods I'd have the same problem. Maybe you need to simplify you life, and not attack those that make less than you.
JGarza | 01.24.08 - 2:07 pm | #

I dunno, I've been living in the NYC metro area on just over 40k for a while now - since late 2001. It has sucked. I have never made anything my more solvent friends would not refer to as "chump change."
Bernard Quatermass | 01.24.08 - 2:08 pm | #

Sorry, don't agree with your whine, John.
Gregory from Minnesota | 01.24.08 - 2:10 pm | #

Wow. This has got to be satire, right? I've never seen such an off-base post here.
Randall | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:11 pm | #

too many dupont circle martini's john? aww, my heard BLEEDS.

yeah, really, Fuck. You.

racist old queen
aspshortjock | 01.24.08 - 2:12 pm | #

Sheesh! $75k is a 12 step 3 or 4 in the fed govt's payscale. That's a fairly decent paygrade out in the field.

If it is chump change in DC maybe a full-time job is called for and blogging should be a part-time thing. Most of us have to work a 9 to 5 job to earn a living. Or move to the hinterland where it goes further.
jay | 01.24.08 - 2:12 pm | #

John,

$75,000 is not a middle income.

median household income is 48,201... and that often includes 2 income earners.

median individual income is $26,000.

somehow i don't think people making over $75,000 are being screwed. nor do i think it is somehow an average salary.

your thinking is really skewed.

and are you really opposed to helping the poor?
that's the tenor of your argument.
joe in oklahoma | 01.24.08 - 2:12 pm | #

I need to start blogging. Supporting a family on $25K a year with actual work is silly when I could be making 3 times as much by typing about politics and bitching about my good fortune!

Thanks John!
Jesse | 01.24.08 - 2:14 pm | #

As far as any 'check' helping me, one of the poor -- an income tax rebate won't help much, if any, as it did not help any a few years ago. I do, however, pay FISA/SoSec taxes from being self-employed. I'd still have to pay those, I assume.
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 2:16 pm | #

Jesse | 01.24.08 - 2:14 pm |

So do it! I love it when people bitch about choices they made.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 2:16 pm | #

Anyway, the "little people" will only end up spending it at Wal-Mart for shit that comes from China!
jay | 01.24.08 - 2:16 pm | #

I lived in DC for 10 years and recently moved within the past years. If someone can tell me WHERE that $157,000 home is, please let me know?
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 2:08 pm | #

Condos and Anacostia are averaged in there, fella.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 2:17 pm | #

Jeebus.
Wil | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:17 pm | #

one hundred twenty six visitors
quite a funeral
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 2:18 pm | #

Not only that, but I'm single, so the government is taking 40% of my income to pay for that rebate.

I am all for people who make less than me to get what they can from the government before Bush takes that away, too.

I don't live in DuPont Circle and grow orchids, travel around the world, and stuff like that. But the government threatens me with jail if I don't let them take 40% of my income. To me, it's just $80K on paper - what I actually take home after taxes is about $50K, and I live in Metro DC just like you do.

I see people make less than me, but somehow, they make it work, and I'm all for them getting a little extra, but as someone said upthread, this whole economic stimulus package is shyt.

I work at the Fed - even Bernanke is mumbling that we're going into a recession, but was told to say something other than that. I live okay, but I could live better if I had more discretionary income - however, I've learned how to save; how to say "NO" to shyt I don't need, and enjoy myself on free stuff that's offered here in DC.

In other words, remember if and when you went to college and you had to learn how to make do if you were on scholarship and either working a part time job to have extra money, or waiting for mom and dad to put your allowance in the checking account (I worked).

Your post comes off as elitist because you don't have extra cash for your activities and hobbies. Boo freaking hoo - the late Steve Gillard managed very well on the money he earned as a blogger, and didn't complain, either, and he also lived in New Freakin' York (Manhattan, to be precise).

It's easy to get angry at the do-nothing leadership of Reid and Pelosi, but this post sounds like you're better than the rest of us, while I'm thinking "there for the grace of God, I'm only two paychecks away from homelessness", regardless of how my salary looks on my resume.

Reality is a bitch.
The Political Junkie | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:19 pm | #

Speaking of WalMart -- I don't know if this was just locally or nationally -- but right before Christmas WalMarts gave - I think it was - $300 apiece in gift cards to some charity, Salvation Army maybe, the 'catch' was that the cards could ONLY be spent at Walmarts. Walmarts, of course, got quite a nice tax write-off for their 'charitable' contribution.
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 2:19 pm | #

$300 in DC doesn't go that far anyway, John. For instance, I believe that's about what Jeff Gannon charges.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 2:19 pm | #

Sorry, John, don't agree with you on this one.
Actually I don't think rebates do anything but mess up the deficit, but I also don't think a single worker earning over $75,000 in most of the U.S. is really in need of a rebate. And a family earning over $150,000 benefited already from the Bush tax breaks.
As a tenured college professor making _well_ under the $75,000 mark I'll look forward to a check if they want to send me one.
Gary | 01.24.08 - 2:21 pm | #

John,

You really need to get out and go visit other parts of the country.

$75,000 isn't middle class. It's upper-middle class. And since I'm in that category, I'm FINE with not getting a check. I'd MUCH RATHER have it go TO POOR people where it will make a big difference.

There are kids in families that make less than $12,000 per year. Do you really begrudge them a break? Seriously? Do you really want to live like them? Do you really resent them?

Jesus. What a greedy schmuck.
brat | 01.24.08 - 2:22 pm | #

Anonymous would have you believe he makes better than $75k/yr while he spends the day posting his useless takes on society on a blog.

Yeah. I'm gonna buy into that. NOT
The Other Anon | 01.24.08 - 2:04 pm
------------------------------------

believe what you want. But, I am sitting at work right now blogging on this site because I don't feel like doing anything today.

And Sedoy, I told you I would save it and I meant it. If I wanted to upgrade my PC, I wouldn't need a check from t he govt to do it, I would just do it.

As far as spending money in Walmart.. Of course it would help the economy. It wouldn't help US manufacturers, but it would help the retail industry. If buying retail products doesn't help the economy, why do they always make such a big deal out of how good or bad the Christmas spending season is?
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 2:22 pm | #

So the U.S. is going to borrow $150 million dollars and send it out to low-income people. That isn't the issue. What are they going to do long term? Why have so many people not qualified for regular mortgages and had to settle for the subprime? What are they going to do about "good" jobs? How about the inequities between the CEO's and their own employees? Let's raise the minimum wage to a living wage so people have money continuously to spend and don't have to rely on a $300 check from the federal government.
MN USA | 01.24.08 - 2:25 pm | #

anonymity not approved by the appointed court and unlegislated
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 2:28 pm | #

Wow. Boo fucking hoo for poor upper-middle class, self centered wanker.
Just Sayin' | 01.24.08 - 2:28 pm | #

When I hear a person who claims to be progressive press the Republican Class Warfare hot button of "redistributing wealth (that would be our wealth) to the poor" it makes me cringe.

And San Fran Nan: Every ball bounces upward as it bounces down the stairs into the basement.
.
chandler in lasvegas | 01.24.08 - 2:29 pm | #

True the middle class are screwed. We tend to pay for more for everthing, proportional to the money we bring in. But $75k and $150k are logical cutoffs. A couple earning $150k are pretty comfortable in most of the country. I feel your pain, John. I live in a high -cost area to. But that is a choice. Suck it up big boy, no rebate for you. And yes, you sounded very whiny.
fifilaru | 01.24.08 - 2:29 pm | #

Here's the best part. Reading the linked article, Pelosi says they're going to give "the poor" a $300 check instead of adjusting food stamps for the inflation that's coming. The isn't helping "the poor" either - they're gonna be mighty hungry at the end of the month, come fall.
marhsmallow | 01.24.08 - 2:30 pm | #

I was just thinking the same thing. Here in Chicago my partner and I paid 800K for a small 2 bedroom house and shell out over 2K a month for child care. We're middle class, despite our above 75K per year incomes. Another fucked-up decision that ends up screwing over the masses.
pc | 01.24.08 - 2:31 pm | #

A few hundred bucks does NOT change the spending habits of anyone who makes more than 75K, no matter where they live.

15K wouldn't change that much!

Upscale much?

Give the 74.999 and below even more if you really want to spur a change! Except, spending now would not actually BE a change, consumers have been floating this economy for more than a decade now!
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 2:32 pm | #

anonymous | 01.24.08 - 2:22 pm |

I am not talking about things you want to do. I am talking about getting extra 600 and deciding to do something with it.
Spending at Walmart will not help. Most, if not all, products there are made in China. Walmart will not hire more people because of that rebate, so it will not help retail industry. And Christmas season is unique because millions are buying something. And by the way, people who spend most during Christmas are the ones making over 75K.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 2:32 pm | #

I see where In-and-Out Burger in California is starting their burger flippers at $10 an hour in some areas, way above the national minimum wage. They had better watch out or they might not qualify for the rebate.

http://www.npr.org/templates/ sto...storyId=6288944

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 2:33 pm | #

I think this is the post that's gonna knock americablog off my rss list.

I live in the SF Bay Area. I make upwards of 85k. Yeah, it would sorta suck not getting a stimulus check. But really.. I choose to live in this area because I like it. People live in these expensive areas because they want to. An extra $300 here for me or for someone in NY won't do much. Pay that little bit more on your CC payment? Buy a couple tanks of gas? For this sort of stimulus to be effective, they need it to be spent on stuff.

However, in a country with a negative savings rate, not to mention all the other shit, this sort of stimulus is like trying to dig a mineshaft with a spoon. And focusing on whether 80% or 81% of Americans gets this check is wrongheaded.

Bye John, et al.
Mushuweasel | 01.24.08 - 2:34 pm | #

First - I want to say that the rebate check is a stupid idea. We'll pay (or the next generation will) for it at some point - so really this is only a loan with no guaranteed interest rate. However, comparing someone living in DC as opposed to someone in rural Texas is just silly. First - we are not talking about a windfall here. Second, no one has held a gun to your head and told you where to live or how much money you're allowed to make. These amounts are all arbitrary, but we've all made decisions that have long term ramifications - what degree to get, how many hours am I willing to work to get ahead, what nowhere city am I willing to live in, and not all decisions end in the results we expect. Blaming congress and Chimpy on your eligibility for the rebate is silly - blaming them for an idiotic stimulus plan is respectable.
lfrank | 01.24.08 - 2:35 pm | #

My partner bought a $200K all brick 2200 sq. ft. new home with an 80 X 65 foot back yard here in Houston. Our combined pensions don't even come up to $75K. Plus we are to have temperatures in the 70's all next week. :p

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 2:37 pm | #

The rebates are far too small to do anything at all. This money will service previous spending debt, not new spending.

This is why the GOP agreed to this - their corporate supporters will get most of this money eventually.
ulitave | 01.24.08 - 2:37 pm | #

lets not forget WHY housing in those areas is OUTRAGEOUS! That last Bubble took care of that. How about prices come back to reality. Getting a "whole house" (WOW) for 275K should be the norm.
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 2:39 pm | #

This stimulus package is nothing more than a "feel good" political move. However, it will help those families living on $400 a week. Sad to see those making over $75-150K bitching about their lawn services people and maids (many times under the table and below the minimum wage) bitching about giving a little to the poor.

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 2:41 pm | #

Sedoy -

You are the one lacking the "smarts." Almost all research has shown that one-time, small rebate checks do not spur the economy, they just end up paying down debt or being saved.

This, by default, will be a "help" refund. If it's meant to spur the economy, then it should be based on market research about who is most likely to spend money in areas that would most boost the market.
chrisnyc | 01.24.08 - 2:41 pm | #

thought about it some more. John, you still sound whiny.

The stimulus check is a rotten idea. But if they are going to send one, everyone should get one. It is not suppose to help people, it is suppose to stimulate the economy. They want us to spend it. This is not a redistribution of the wealth, it is a Republican strategy to shore-up their flagging attempt to recapture the WH.

John, your arguments were somewhat sound, but your screed on the cost of YOUR living put it bad spin on them.
fifilaru | 01.24.08 - 2:41 pm | #

ulitave | 01.24.08 - 2:37 pm

Exactly!
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 2:42 pm | #

So what your saying is, the rest of us should subsidize your choice to live in an absurdly expensive place? This, from the guy who whines about baling out people who were "stupid" in their choice of house loans? You really are coming off more and more as a myopic snob. And by the way, 75K a year hardly puts you in the "middle." It makes you rich by most people's standards. You need to get out of your elitist bubble and check out reality once in a while, if you can spare time from your fucking orchids and trips to Paris.
Paul Mendenhall | 01.24.08 - 2:43 pm | #

They didn't take away my rebate. I make a whole $25K a year.

If you even have the ability to buy your residence, consider yourself lucky. I can barely afford to rent my place. I would consider myself lucky if I made $75K a year. That would be three times what I make now. So forgive me if I don't feel sorry that those of you who don't really need it might not get anything. Our sense as a culture of what constitutes necessities is completely out of whack, and you've just confirmed it for me.

Hooray for Champagne Socialism! (And for confirming conservative talking points about liberals.)
Klayton | 01.24.08 - 2:43 pm | #

They gave away MY stimulus check?

Uh...what makes you think I make $75,000 a year, dicklick?
jamming econo | 01.24.08 - 2:44 pm | #

pc, if you paid 800k for 2 bedrooms, don't call yourself part of "the masses"

trust me, "the masses" do not live like that nor do they have the luxury of spending money like that.
joe in oklahoma | 01.24.08 - 2:45 pm | #

I suspect that when JohnA reappears from his latest orchid-buying trip - or whever he is today - there will be a bunch of deleted comments on this thread. Followed by assertions that the only ones deleted were just 'asshole,' attack comments.
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 2:47 pm | #

The whole thing is a band-aid made of dogshit anyway.
Jody | 01.24.08 - 2:47 pm | #

Last year I sent A-Blog $25 from a gross income of $23K. I didn't complain about redistributing MY wealth.

John, I feel sorry for you today. Put down the poodle, step away from the orchids and apologize.
chandler in lasvegas | 01.24.08 - 2:48 pm | #

Even though I think this is a terrible idea, I won't protest by not cashing my check.

The way I WILL protest... the most un-American gesture of all: I will use that money to pay down my personal debt.
Theropod | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:49 pm | #

Here's a picture of our $200K 2200 sq. ft. humble abode in suburban Houston that we paid $165K for nearly 3 years ago. Persons who are living above their means might consider down-sizing, even moving.

http://thumbsnap.com/v/TqWxGyIZ.jpg

Grant in Houston | 01.24.08 - 2:52 pm | #

I have been away from this blog for a long time every since I was once banned for not agreeing with Heir John. A friend called me to say John was getting his log cabin repug ass handed to him by a lot of regular folks - had to come see.

HA HA maybe we should start complaining to his ad folk - hit him in his 75K pocket. I almost feel sorry for him - almost not!
John Nee Boy | 01.24.08 - 2:56 pm | #

First off, the MOST IMPORTANT COMMENT on this topic is this one:

The rebates are a bad idea irrespective of how they are distributed.

This is one more failed idea piled on top of a whole bunch of failed ideas. However, I don't believe for a minute that the main reason for this "rebate" has anything to do with the economy...it seems to be working in a very Rovian way by turning the Upple Middle Class folks who are watching their buying power decrease exponentially against the Middle-middle, Lower-middle and Poor classes who are finding it harder and harder to tread water.

We've already lost the battle if we all regress into the "not enough to go around" mentality because then we're all on the road to becoming Republicans.

Your feelings are totally valid, John. The crap economy is screwing everyone, including those folks who spent a helluva lot on their educations and have worked their butts off to reach a certain level in their lives. You rightly had expectations that your work was going to pay off in certain ways that the Repubs have been slowly draining from us all. And it's no more or less tragic because you happen to have more to lose than many of the rest of us.

However, as the "moral guidance" behind Americablog, we need you to be grounded in reality. We need you to understand that most of us who depend on you for the truth think we're doing well if our family income is $75,000.00. My husband and I just hit that this year and we felt like we have truly accomplished something (since I'm disabled and only earn a fraction of what he does). You'd be well-served to look up statistics on the differences between the classes - your earnings (and your status) make you part of the Upper Middle Class - and puts you in the top 20% of all incomes in the country.

I know it's easy to look at the folks around you in D.C. and think that you should be making more...we have the same feeling here surrounded by the oil folks. However, that game of comparing and contrasting is a trap. In Alaska, we've been going through FBI hell this year by watching the convictions of so many of our politicians who felt like "they deserved more" and used that to justify selling their votes. That didn't happen overnight - it took years of resentment to get them there...years of believing that "there wasn't enough to go around."

I encourage you to see this bullshit plan for what it is...an attempt to delay the inevitable and set up the next Administration for failure. I also encourage you to find that "gratitude" place within yourself - you are young, healthy, attractive, brilliant, live more-than-comfortably, are able to regularly travel the world and are sought for your counsel by millions of readers around the globe

There aren't very many folks who can boast of a life like that.
Celtic Diva | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 2:57 pm | #

If only John got that stimulus check-- maybe he could have his calluses removed at a nice spa.
e_five | 01.24.08 - 2:59 pm | #

John is such a whiny little brat. Waaaaah waaaaaah John. And if you don't like the fucking housing prices in DC, then fucking COMMUTE you baby. If you take the bus it will give you ample time to think about what a whiny pussy you've become.
RP | 01.24.08 - 3:00 pm | #

this post is different from Bob Grant...how?
b.w. | 01.24.08 - 3:00 pm | #

John Nee Boy | 01.24.08 - 2:56 pm |

I DID complain to one of his ad folks - Absinthe - over his 'big girls' comment. Co-incidence, maybe, but within a week the ad was gone.

I say go for it, John Nee Boy!
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:00 pm | #

John - you need to also take into account that you get a whole lot more than a roof over your head in DC. You get culture, museums, art, interesting people, public transportation, good food. Someone in Idaho might get a great buy on property - but they have to drive 2 hours to find a Target.
lfrank | 01.24.08 - 3:01 pm | #

Orchids must give off some toxin that makes one very selfish.

I still can't get over how horrible this post is.
Who really wrote it?

Malkin?
Limbaugh?
Colter?
Savage?
Broder?
Carlson?

Aravosis?
Really?
Whose side are you on?

Prat!
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 3:02 pm | #

A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:00 pm
-----------------------------------

What "Big Girls" comment was that? I must have missed that one...
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:02 pm | #

Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:02 pm |

Oh, Polly.......
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:02 pm | #

Let's see... a post about how the poor are screwing the upper middle class, and now they've got a Chevron ad at the top of the page encouraging more oil drilling.

Did you spend a little too much time with your orchids in the hothouse? Are you having some kind of Ted Stevens flashback?
e_five | 01.24.08 - 3:03 pm | #

grant that place is HUGE for 165k!!!

I can't get that here in small town wisconsin!

Yes I make under 20k / year and yes I will be cashing this check when it comes... as for you asshats who claim I'll be paying off my big screen tv or going to wal mart you're delusional. I'm using this money as a down payment on a new house which WILL stimulate the housing market which is what is wrong w/ the system at the moment.

I don't really like the idea of tax cuts, but you know what everyone?

In my situation it is doing exactly what it is intended to do: stop the housing problems and give me a little extra spending power.

People can cry and whine about cost of living but I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you can't afford to live where you're living then move to a different house/apt.
Cut out your mickey D's and starbucks soy latte's. Stop driving your newer SUV's that require hundreds of dollars in gas every month to get you that 30 miles on-road to work.

Most of all remember the things in life that you take for granted.
Remember that hot showers are a luxury to 80% of the WORLD.

I'd literally KILL to make 75000$ in ANY CITY in America. I've never been to Europe and I'll probably never get there on my salary, but it's not for lack of trying as assholes like busboy would have you believe. I have a college degree in Computer Science / Analyst (not currently in the field however) I work part time so I can raise my daughter and don't have to spend 150-160$ / week on daycare. I rarely see my wife.

These are the sacrifices I make to have what I want in 20 years. Those of you who are unwilling or unable to sacrifice now to get what you want later have no pity coming from me.
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 3:03 pm | #

-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:02 pm
================================

seriously, what was said?
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:04 pm | #

John Nee Boy,

I was banned here once to for using the word Republicunt.

Now we know why.

It cut to close to home.

Progressive my arse!
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 3:04 pm | #

Wow, worst AmericaBlog post ever?

John may run the place, but he is the worst part of AmericaBlog by far. Anyone who can't live off $75,000 in SanFran is an idiot. $150,000 for couples? Holy shit! Sign me up for the No Rebates class, please!
Marlarkey | 01.24.08 - 3:05 pm | #

Yes Grant,

Lovely home...Congrats!
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:05 pm | #

Well, cliff notes Polly, JohnA claimed it was not only an insult, but a perfectly fine one, to call someone a 'girl' or a 'big girl.'

Several of us tried to explain that was an insult to the female population - and lots of the males, too - but only got our posts deleted.
A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:08 pm | #

Grant, that is a lovely home, but it is in Houston.:P This stimulus is bullshit, but the post is ridiculous. How dare the Dems look out for poor people. What a douchebag.
Gus | 01.24.08 - 3:11 pm | #

Wow. Just wow. Way to look out for number one John. Very progressive.
mcsey | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:12 pm | #

A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:08 pm
==================================

I can't say I'm surprised these days. By the way, I also agree that term is insulting no matter what size you may be. I also can't stand the term "girls" when referring to an adult women, but I may alone on that one...
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:13 pm | #

Um, has anyone pointed out that John's facts are wrong? There is a gradual phase out. You still get a refund up to $87,000 for singles, more if you have children.

I'd argue that if you live in DC and have $100,000 worth of school debt, it can still be pretty hard. $600 isn't a lot, but it may pay for new tires for your car or may allow you to save something for once.

For the record, though, I think that the $ amounts chosen are ok, though I am not quite clear on how this works for single parents...this isn't tax relief, or a welfare program, so I don't see how the argument about screwing the upper middle class applies. We're trying to get the money who will use it to buy goods and services rather than people who might invest or save it.
AH | 01.24.08 - 3:14 pm | #

I agree 100% with Marlarkey. John IS the worst poster on Americablog, without question. And, imho, AJ is the best. When is AJ gonna start his own blog??
RP | 01.24.08 - 3:17 pm | #

Where am I? What a crappy whiner post.

Maybe we should scrape together 800 bucks so John will stop crying.

That post really changed my opinion of this blog. Think I'll spend my time elsewhere.
scojo | 01.24.08 - 3:17 pm | #

A-mousloon | 01.24.08 - 3:08 pm
=================================

By the way, I've had a number of my posts suddenly "disappear" from sight. Funny how that happens, eh?
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:22 pm | #

So do it! I love it when people bitch about choices they made.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 2:16 pm |

Wasn't bitching. I was pointing out how stupid it is to bitch about making too much money to get some gov't rebate. And where I live, $25K is fine. However, John apparently thinks I'm poor and shouldn't get anything he doesn't get.

And choices? He made a choice to live in an area with a high standard of living. Boo frickin' hoo.

Oh, and thanks for repeatedly telling
us all how we'll spend our money.

#1 - I don't shop at Wal Mart.
#2 - My check will go to catching up on my past-due electricity bill
#3 - The check will come in time for back-to-school
#4 - As you said to someone else: FUCK YOU!
Jesse | 01.24.08 - 3:23 pm | #

Well, if this were about actual stimulus I could understand your rage. But really, it's about appeasing voters while jobs are sent overseas, wealth is redistributed upward, tax cuts cripple us with debt, economic insecurity grows and the health of our nation declines.

So, thanks for the money Congress, but that hardly gets you off the hook.
Xanthippas | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:24 pm | #

I believe it was a compromise so that the low earners {{ the ones who really need the money most}} would get some money. Originally it was to go in the form of a tax rebate in which those making under 30K for a family of 4 would have gotten nothing.

If the whole idea is to stimulate the economy by making people spend the money, giving it to the poorest people will do the trick. Not that the trick is gonna work for the train wreck economy we have now...
wasab | 01.24.08 - 3:26 pm | #

In the talks, Pelosi pressed to make sure tax relief would find its way into the hands of lower-income earners while Boehner pushed to include upper middle-class couples, according to congressional aides.

....Democrats had pressed to extend unemployment benefits for people whose 26 weeks of benefits have run out, but Republicans resisted.

John, you kinda made an ass out of yourself here. Care to post an update and explain?
HiO | 01.24.08 - 3:32 pm | #

They haven't given away MY stimulus check. I don't make 75,000/yr and I live in the Seattle area, which has a pretty darned high cost of living too.
Nagada | 01.24.08 - 3:32 pm | #

Polly,

Be glad you missed the "Big Girl" controversy.

As well as I can remember it, it was something like this.

John used the term "Big Girl" as a perjorative. Several women didn't like the fact that he used the term in a derogatory manner thus implying it was bad to be a girl. I guess kind of like telling some teenage boy that he throws a ball like a "girl". It implies that girls are unable to throw a ball and also that being a girl is less than desireable.

In my mind it is the same as kids today using the term "that's so gay" and then trying to claim it isn't derogatory to gays. It certainly is. They are describing something that is less than desireable and equating it to being gay. By extension, being gay is not desireable.

John tried to talk his way out of it by claimimng the term "Big Girl" in gay man's speak is not derogatory to women. It all went downhill from there.
anonymous | 01.24.08 - 3:33 pm | #

"$150k for a family in NY Metro area doesn't get you very far, at all..........People in this salary range pay the most in taxes and never get anything in return for it. Jersey Girl"

hey jersey girl, dont whine here, complain to your Governor, Corzine. Why that idiot is choosing to raise tolls to balance the states debt, when the problem in NJ is clearly corruption by politicians and the lack of guts to tax all ther millionaires who live in NJ properly. I mean give me a break. You could easily raise the gas tax & income tax to solve your problems and fulfill your needs (I am sick of NJ drivers clogging NY roads because your state refuses to invest in their infrastructure and provide transportation to commuters, which is ironic becuase you are a state of commuters (Penn also gets screwed this way too)
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 3:37 pm | #

To all those who think John needs to get out and see America for how it really is, if you remember, he couldn't even FIND America some time ago! He asked for where he could find small town America or some such thing in a post.

Pull off any major artery outside a beltway and you have it.
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 3:38 pm | #

You know, I read this post a couple hours ago, made my comment, and went about my day. Thing is, I can't stop thinking about it.

I'm thinking how sad it is. The sense of grudge in missing out on government hand-out by a single guy making over $75,000 a year is killing me. To me, this post quite nicely illustrates the sense of entitlement so many $75,000 wage earners have, while living beyond their means. This is what got us all in this mess in the first place.

I wont be getting a check. And that's not a problem. But, John's post and the sub-text it contains is a big problem in this country.
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 3:40 pm | #

You're kidding, right? Right? You sound like Archie Bunker. What the hell gives?
Jeff Altemus | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:46 pm | #

I'm one of the so-called poor you just dissed. I'll leave it to your imagination as to what I thought of your pathetic excuse of a post.
James | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:48 pm | #

Has Aravosis admitted he's a whiny-ass titty baby yet, or that his post was entirely stupid?
F. Frederson | 01.24.08 - 3:48 pm | #

I'm with you John. The issue isn't about "where's mine"--- It’s about the “cost of living” disparity and that fact that the middle class is again left holding the bag. Rebates for the lower class and tax relief for the upper-class. The rest of us are left in the middle, getting it from both ends - and not in the good way! I am all for helping out, but why just the middle-class?
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 3:50 pm | #

Good catch, Jeff, on the Archie Bunker comparison!
James | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:53 pm | #

Listen to you, you sound like conservative Republicans. "How dare the government keep my money," welcome to the soft sunshine of being of and in the right!
Johnny Quest | 01.24.08 - 3:55 pm | #

You know, I've been counting on this blog to deliver real info to me for a few years now and while it does, most of the time, this post was one of the most obnoxious pieces I have read in the left or right wing press. John couldhave made his point in a very realistic way, buut no we get a temper tantruum regarding the fact that his particular choice of where he lives and his income doesn't qualify for the obscenely ridiculous rebate of 300 dollars the fed is offering...or what ever. It's not the issue and you turn it into a ridiculous class thing, okay!
More and more, I feel a mean spirited elitist tone seeping into the thread of this blog...
microdot | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 3:56 pm | #

Their decision is not so much about money, but to destroy the Collective.
Just look at what anger was expressed from the get go from all parties. The top 1% have been at War with the rest of us for a long time. They have perfected ways to Divide & Conquer. They are the Enemy. It's not just a War Racket. The Racket extends to all organs of the Centralized Government. They are the greatest threat to We The People's National Security.
Peace.

Peace.
Human | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 4:00 pm | #

Where in this post does John say he wouldn't be eligible for the refund? Lots of people jumping to conclusions here -- weird.
MM | 01.24.08 - 4:05 pm | #

Methinks if John were straight he'd be a Republican.
pt | 01.24.08 - 4:07 pm | #

This post and comments are really depressing.

I had no idea that I am as poor as I apparently am. Somehow I've managed to be happy all the while cutting back and trying to just make do with what I have (which really isn't much on the scale of things). I rarely "go out", entertainment is basically the internet and the occasional rented movie. But the point was, I was generally, reasonably happy.

I just had no idea that I was so poor.
Treading Deep Water | 01.24.08 - 4:08 pm | #

i agree pt

Joh makes it clear in the last paragraph that dems are only helping the poor. nice to know that John and his defenders think a 60,000 income is poverty level.
joe in oklahoma | 01.24.08 - 4:08 pm | #

$75,000 seems like a good start to me. I'm in college now, but when I was growing up, my single, working mom working at post office only ever brought home $45000. She lost her job my senior year of high school and now she works two full time jobs: 6 days a week as a cook at Bob Evans and 5 nights a week working thirds at Walmart. I don't think John realizes the very bottom of middle-class border-line poor of this country very well.
renie | 01.24.08 - 4:09 pm | #

You are way off base. I live in the Bay Area, and for a couple to make $150K, that's considered high and more than enough to support a family.
Jessica | 01.24.08 - 4:10 pm | #

While you make pretty speeches
I'm being cut to shreds
You feed me to the lions
A delicate balance

And this just feels like spinnin' plates
I'm livin' in cloud cuckoo land
And this just feels like spinnin' plates
My body's floatin' down the muddy river
________________________________________

radiohead. "like spinning plates." amnesiac.
madmadworld | 01.24.08 - 4:12 pm | #

this is not a progressive post. in fact its anti-progressive values scream out loud and clear.

if there was true progressive party, you can bet john would not be in it.
alan | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 4:13 pm | #

Can we go back one version of Americablog, please? The new fancy ads make this web-site really slow (not just to load, but also to run - what a CPU hog!).

Bonus: John will make less money on ads so that his income may fall under the "rich" limit and he can cash that stimulus check!

Win-Win!!
galore | 01.24.08 - 4:13 pm | #

Seriously. I have a law degree and I make half of that. Granted, I work for Legal Services, giving free legal advice to poor people, so I have greater earning potential than I'm making and I'm obvious biased. But still, I don't really care where you live. $75,000 a year is enough money not to need a $300 rebate check.

Why is it that whenever the poor get something they *need* and the middle class *could use* people scream that the middle class is getting screwed? $300 to someone making $16,000 a year is food money. To someone making $75 grand it's a friggin' iPod.
Greenbandit | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 4:14 pm | #

I would bet most your readers are going to get checks. If your not getting a check...boofuckinhoo!
Hookatoe | 01.24.08 - 4:15 pm | #

temper tantrums. hissy fits. americablog.
joe in oklahoma | 01.24.08 - 4:21 pm | #

Most people who make less than $75000 ARE middle class and are not "the poor". If you are living in one of the cities this guy's crying about, a $1000 is a much smaller amount than a typical, small-town middle classer. I don't care if you live in NY or LA... if you're making $100,000, you're not that bad off.

WAH!
Josh1000f | 01.24.08 - 4:23 pm | #

The Dems and Repubs want to give us poor folk (singles making < 75K or couples < 150K per year)a $600-1200 "rebate" so we'll go out an purchase goods and services? The Dems should make sure that there is something in the deal about increasing wages and reducing outsourcing. Otherwise, we'll be getting these "rebates" every 6 months or until other countries get tired of loaning us the money.
hmmmm | 01.24.08 - 4:27 pm | #

This post is an early April fools joke ...right?
Craig Bennett | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 4:28 pm | #

John,

You missed the point. This is a ploy. It's an alternative to a bailout that favors credit card companies. As opposed to giving Citybank their money outright, the government has decided to give it to the people who are in debt. To ensure that this rebate money will be funneled to the credit companies, they've narrowed down elegebility to the low to middle income bracket. These are the people who are likely to have debt. So, this rebate is effectively a bailout that rewards the greed and stupidity of the credit companies.

Let's not be mistaken here. The credit card companies should pay the price for making dodgy and unfair loans! Congress needs to reenstate the usery and backruptcy laws that have been repealed in recent years. that's how you protect consumers.
Horace | 01.24.08 - 4:43 pm | #

I'm going to cool it on AmericaBlog for awhile, even though this comments thread shows that the readership is cooler than I thought. Thumbs up to all of you.

I've been coming here since the '04 election for concise news, but too many odd off-platform points are wasting our time. AmericaBlog just needs to become focused and well-rounded again, that's all.
Marlarkey | 01.24.08 - 4:44 pm | #

This entry is the most obscenely offensive thing I've read in a long time. The sad thing is that Aravosis probably has no idea why his attitude is making so many here angry.

I for one am done with this site. I can't in good conscience bookmark and read anything by someone with this kind of narcissistic, elitist mindset. John, you are a quintessential douchebag. Please go back to the Republican party. We don't need your kind.
B | 01.24.08 - 4:19 pm |

John has done more to advance gay rights and equality and expose hypocrisy in the right more than any other blogger. All you people jumping down his throat, I'm sorry, are wrong. I've lived in NY. I've lived in DC. What you fail to recognize is EXSACTLY what John says. A guy living in a mansion in Omaha making $74,000 gets a rebate check, while a guy living in a 300 sq f studio apartment making $76,000K and VERY HIGH state and local taxes barely gets by.

John -- keep it up. I tip my hat to you.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 4:44 pm | #

Oh, and if you all think Brooklyn is "affordable", you need to take another toke. A home in Park Slope sells in the MILLIONS. Read that? MILLIONS.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 4:51 pm | #

Does anyone think that the popularity of John's blog will suffer for his non-populist leanings? Because really, this is rather disheartening. The Democrats have been working hard to make the Republicans actually stand by their rhetoric. If they REALLY want this bill to jump-start the economy, they'll send the checks to the people who are going to spend the money as quickly as possible -- in other words, those in the lower tax brackets. In reality, republicans cough up their coffee at actually having to give money to "those people".

I make $85k/year in San Francisco and don't have much in savings but can pay my monthly bills, so I'd put the money in my savings for a rainy day. I'm not who needs it the most. I can't imagine selling my soul for a few hundred bucks with posts whining about how poor I am.

Way to go, John.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 4:54 pm | #

ouch! | 01.24.08 - 3:40 pm |

"To me, this post quite nicely illustrates the sense of entitlement so many $75,000 wage earners have, while living beyond their means. This is what got us all in this mess in the first place." - entitlement? To your information, most of those making 75K are not Paris Hiltons of this world. These are real people who went to school, have student loans to pay off, have houses, and have kids for whom they have to plan how to pay their college costs that increase every year. So if I do not feel sorry for the guy who chose to make 7 dollars an hour - excuse me.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 4:54 pm | #

Everyone's point is well taken that $75,000 per year for an individual and $150,000 for a couple is not even close to the median income. The mean, maybe, but as you most certainly know the mean can be skewed radically by a few large incomes.

Part of this is the upper middle class is starting to feel the pinch that hit so many other people like a wave a long time ago. Welcome to our world, John, and if things keep going the way they are get ready for worse.
Justin | 01.24.08 - 4:55 pm | #

I now think it an honor to have been banned from this unsavory website.

This is just Republicunt light.

Stayed away for almost two years. Only started giving americablog a peek a few months back.

I feel like Dorothy peeking behind the curtain and finding out the wizard is a turd.

Back to true progressive sites.
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 5:02 pm | #

IF you really wanted to stimulate spending.

>50K nadda, maybe $300.00
50K

A few hundred bucks will do nothing at all to help our current economic state.
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 5:02 pm | #

Here in the Big City, NYC, over 80% of residents make less than $75,000. I know John might find that hard to believe, but see

http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/ Pull...ApartNY2006.pdf

page 11. Amazing how many people aren't middle class, isn't it?
JD | 01.24.08 - 5:02 pm | #

This is sort of like John's posts about how there should be no bailout of the greedy schlumps who chose to get snookered by variable interest rate mortgages. He had some good points but chose to package them in hand-waving all-caps fits about how the non-greedy intelligent people stayed out of those loans and shouldn't pay the price. Forget dishonest mortgage brokers and banks giving loans to people who couldn't afford them -- it was all about the greedy bastards being foreclosed on.

AmericaBlog - champion of the poor, tired, hungry D.C. lawyers renting apartments and barely getting by on $100k/year.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 5:03 pm | #

John... I'm a big fan of you and the site. I respectfully disagree with your take on the Middle class and the stimulous package. The line had to be drawn somewhere and it just seems a little selfish (hate to use this word for someone who've I've respected for years) to expect special consideration because you and I live in desirable locations. I'd rather lower income people get the rebates and the rest of us making $75k and living in SF or NY will just have to find new ways to live within our means.
AppeaseThis | 01.24.08 - 5:05 pm | #

that should be
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 5:07 pm | #

When will this post be removed and posters who diagree with Ms. Aravosis be banned?

I think it is coming.

A certain ego won't let this last for long.
better dead then redstate | 01.24.08 - 5:09 pm | #

partial posts now, forget this.

Get 2.0 or close it down. WTF, five IT projects have been completed by me in this time!
Hawk | 01.24.08 - 5:09 pm | #

I never heard if those like me who live on retirement income but pay taxes get a rebate.
rod davis | 01.24.08 - 5:09 pm | #

Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 4:54 pm | #

Drink much?
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 5:13 pm | #

No one fucking chooses to make $7.00/hr, they do it because it's the only job they can get.

Jesus.
Adam K. | 01.24.08 - 5:14 pm | #

The median family income in the US is what, $35,000? So this limit that bothers you so much includes people who make DOUBLE the median income. In other words, more than 2/3 of the country.

Here's what happens John: by increasing demand, the economy gets rolling again and the middle class people like you get the good jobs. Just like the last time and the time before. The problem in the US right now is that factories can't sell their goods and professionals (that would be you) can't sell their services because the HUGE MAJORITY of Americans are earning less than they did 30 years ago.

This stimulus will increase demand - and help you, John. Stop whining. Most Americans would be delighted to make over $75,000 a year.
Cambridgemac | 01.24.08 - 5:18 pm | #

Welcome to one of the nastier aspects of Movement Conservatism's desired income inequality.

Where the bottom 95% get screwed so that the top 1% can benefit, and the top 0.1% can benefit enormously.

Does that mean that if you're at 90%, you have a right to complain that you're not getting yours from the Dems?

That said, economic stimulus is a tactical measure (not a strategic one) in the class wars as well as financial policy. If people below the poverty line spend it the fastest, it should go to people below the poverty line.

$150k/household is a lot of money, and covers any reasonable idea of middle class...

UNLESS you're trying to make your life in an expensive gay enclave in the middle of a metropolis.
Anonymo | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 5:21 pm | #

John has done more to advance gay rights and equality and expose hypocrisy in the right more than any other blogger. All you people jumping down his throat, I'm sorry, are wrong.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 4:44 pm | #

John's done lots to advanced gay rights, so he must also be right about this issue which has nothing whatsoever to do with gay rights. Gotcha.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 4:57 pm |

That's not what I was talking about, moron.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 5:22 pm | #

Stop whining and move somewhere inexpensive. Who the hell would deliberately live in D.C., any way?
Pechorin | 01.24.08 - 5:25 pm | #

given that there are people in his very city that get by well on less then 30k/year, I think the lady doth protest too much.
terry | 01.24.08 - 5:26 pm | #

Adam K. | 01.24.08 - 5:14 pm |

B.S. It is the only choice when you make it to be the only one. I am not bashing the poor. But I get very angry when people make middle class look like they are all Trumps of the world. And 150K a year for a family is middle class. Because not only these 150K have to pay taxes and regular expenses, they also have to take care of future education costs for their children and pay student loans that let them make 150K a year.
Sedoy | 01.24.08 - 5:31 pm | #

I have no arguments that Brooklyn has become expensive, but I choose to live there and I make it work. And yes, I am lucky that I have a partner to share expenses, but for almost one year while he was unemployed I shouldered the rent and still was able to make ends meet. How did I do it? Just had to be VERY frugal.

I made no allusions that I could afford to BUY a place, in fact, I agree I couldn't afford it right now. But my point was simply that you can make it work even at an income lower than $75,000 - if you have self-control

I'm not going to try and change your mind about it, but all I can say is that you can live in New York City even at a meager income. Yes, you have to give up getting a nicer place and sacrifice some things.
Chris | 01.24.08 - 5:33 pm | #

The average income of the richest fifth (20%) *families* in NYC was $137k with the top 1% in 2003 averaging $233,604.

Time to get your head out of your ass. . .

>Here in the Big City, NYC, over 80% >of residents make less than $75,000. >I know John might find that hard to >believe, but see
>
>http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/ >Pull...ApartNY2006.pdf
>
>page 11. Amazing how many people >aren't middle class, isn't it?
>JD | 01.24.08 - 5:02 pm | #
SK | 01.24.08 - 5:33 pm | #

are you kidding me? If you can't get by on 75k a year you have some money management issues to deal with. Try living within your means for a while you doofus.
FireCrow | 01.24.08 - 5:33 pm | #

"they're apparently geared towards redistributing wealth (that would be our wealth) to the poor."

Who's we, pale face?

Uh, isn't the point to direct the stimulus towards those who would most quickly spend it, as in middle to lower income?

You are a fuck, John Aravosis, and a dumb fuck at that! Now to delete your damned site from my bookmarks.
lilybelle | 01.24.08 - 5:45 pm | #

Give me a break John. I lived in DC until August of 2007 and I made $36,000 a year when I left. I paid $1,200 a month for a one bedroom apartment in a nice part of Capitol Hill (that had an in apartment washer and dryer no less). Sure, you can pay $2,000 a month for a one bedroom in DC but it's going to be a very luxurious one bedroom in the most exclusive neighborhoods, eg. Georgetown, DuPont Circle, etc. If I had made $75K a year I wouldn't have had to leave DC and would have lived extremely well. At 75K per year a single person could stay well within accepted financial guidelines and pay anywhere from $1,500-$2,062 for rent/mortgage. You may not be able to live in a palace in Metro DC for that amount, but you can live very nicely. I hope you take a good, hard look at the way your readers are responding to this post, because if you think that a single person living in Washington DC on over 75K per year is a part of the "average middle class" and in need of assistance from the government- well all I can guess is that the people you hang out with are really freakin' rich. Please start living in the real world. If you as a single male in metro DC make over 75K per year, you are at the most pessimistic UPPER middle class, but more realistically you are relatively well off. We can forgive you, because statistics show that most Americans think of themselves as middle class whether they are upper middle class or the working poor. But now that you've been told by your readers, please stop whining and feeling sorry for yourself because in this case, with all due respect you are completely full of it.
Paige | 01.24.08 - 5:50 pm | #

Spoken like the right-wing congressional staffer that Aravosis used to be.

At least get your facts straight, Aravosis. The rebates go to individuals up to $75K and joint returns up to $150K. The median income in this country is $26K per household member, and $48K per household.

I'm single and make $450K a year. The last thing on earth I need is a fucking tax rebate. I wouldn't spend it. The money would plop into my check account and I would never notice it.

I think the stimulus package is a joke, but if they're going to try a stimulus they should give it only to those who will turn right around and spend it. On that score, they got it right.

Now, if they had two brains to rub together in D.C., they'd have enacted a big incentive to install any sort of alternative power or heating system in your house -- solar panels, a geothermal heat pump, even a fuckin' windmill -- within the next year. A couple thousand bucks, cash on the barrelhead.

Attach a provision saying that the money be channeled through a registered dealer, just like the existing solar incentives are. That would stimulate the economy and reduce dependence on foreign fuel.

But no, the politicians only want to give away money in an election year and John Aravosis wants to make sure that he and his yuppie friends get their share of the loot. How sick is that!
Anon | 01.24.08 - 5:59 pm | #

The average income of the richest fifth (20%) *families* in NYC was $137k with the top 1% in 2003 averaging $233,604.

Time to get your head out of your ass. . .
SK | 01.24.08 - 5:33 pm |

Time to learn how to read a chart.

A) You're citing the numbers for families in New York State not including NYC. Look at the middle group, not the bottom group.

B) You're right, I should have pointed out that this is for families. The average *family* income in NYC 2002 for the fourth quintile was $57,000. John was complaining about the $75,000 cutoff for an *individual*. From the chart, we can be certain than more than 70% of families in NYC make less than 57,000. From that, I guessed that at least 80% of families make less than 75,000, a reasonable estimate I think. But we can be sure than way more than 80% of *individuals* make less than 75,000 in NYC. In fact, you can see that probably 95% of families make less than the 150,000 cutoff for a couple.

C) Tone. It makes you look even dumber when you're wrong.
JD | 01.24.08 - 6:04 pm | #

Let the bannings begin!

Perhaps John should rename his blog "BlueState"?

Seriously though, that's quite a rant. Yes, I know 75k a year isn't huge money in NY, San Fran or DC. But it's not bad money in any of those cities either.

I make in excess of 75k and live in a city with a low cost of living.

But I don't want the lousy 600 dollars (or twelve hundred in my married case).

Not when we've almost doubled the national debt in 7 years.
Davebo | 01.24.08 - 6:07 pm | #

If made 75k a year I would not be griping about $300. No one makes anyone live anywhere so... if the cost of living to too high where you are move. Sure you might have to give up a few things and remember in those citys (SF/DC/NY) you are paying for the zip code just as much as the sq/ft. I was personally amazed to see John as the author of this. You feeling ok today John?
WTF | 01.24.08 - 6:08 pm | #

John's done lots to advanced gay rights, so he must also be right about this issue which has nothing whatsoever to do with gay rights. Gotcha.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 4:57 pm |

That's not what I was talking about, moron.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 5:22 pm | #

OK, then why did you mention it? In what way do John's many good works in the area of gay rights back up what you're saying about this particular post? Sorry, I must be missing something.

And why jump so quickly to the name-calling?
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 6:17 pm | #

Meanwhile, those at the bottom (those who work but don't make enough money to pay much in taxes)--get zip. If your gross adjusted income is under 3k, per usual, nobody cares. And bloggers making over 75k complain it's hard to get by on their income?!? My last visit here.
Kayl | 01.24.08 - 6:18 pm | #

bummer. i just checked my 2006 AGI, it was 150,273 for my wife and i.
fivelbbass | 01.24.08 - 6:19 pm | #

But your parents chose to have you. Why the hate for those who breed? Also, you choose to live in overpriced SF.
anon | 01.24.08 - 6:52 pm | #

I will chalk this post/thread up to the 80/20% theory.

I agree with John, UNILATERALLY, over 80% of the time. This anomaly falls into the you-don't-expect-people-to-be-perfect 20%.
.
chandler in lasvegas | 01.24.08 - 6:57 pm | #

Supporting children, their education, their welfare, and their three hundred friggin dollars, is something I actually feel good about. As a gay man, and such.
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 6:58 pm | #

Rebate? What rebate? What their offering is more like pulling a pail of water out of the ocean. The only thing it will do is add to an already out of control deficit and now the news is reporting that whatever this check ends up being, don't expect to see it before May. That four months from now. How many more homes will go into foreclosure while we continue to spend 5 billion a month on a war we didn't need?
Don't be surprised if Bernanke drops interest rates another 3/4% and the dollar continues its fall while gold continues to head towards the moon. Up another $30 today to $913 and counting. The world is flooded with worthless Federal reserve notes that are now coming home to roost in the form of purchases from Soverign Funds that continue to buy more and more of our country. A fire sale to the highest bidder while the preznit, Bernanke, Paulson and Congress tell the middle class what's left of them to go an eat cake or at least the crumbs that are left on the table after they have filled their pockets on the feast.
The system is broken and we the tax payer will ultimately be left with the bill. As some would say, the more things change, the more they stay the same. A revolution set us free as a nation a long time ago, maybe its time to start another.
Andrew | 01.24.08 - 7:01 pm | #

But your parents chose to have you. Why the hate for those who breed? Also, you choose to live in overpriced SF.
anon | 01.24.08 - 6:52 pm |
----------------------------
Because this is where my job is. No hate for my parents at all. Parents should pay for their own kids, not me.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 7:02 pm | #

I am very dissappointed in your commentary on this "rebate", John.
jill | 01.24.08 - 7:02 pm | #

I doubt I will be able to afford to contribute to Democratic candidates since they haven't decided to contribute to me.
Rex in KC | 01.24.08 - 7:06 pm | #

Fuck that shit.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 6:30 pm | #

Well Scott, I'll take all the checks I can get, and be assured, I will spend them in an effort to do my part to stimulate the economy. I mean, after all, it's my money anyway, that I gave them last year.
CDS | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 7:11 pm | #

LoL. . .just looked back at this thread. I was actually agreeing with you, calling John an ass. . .lol, just citing additional evidence.

Top 1% are 233k, and average of top 20% is below the limit they're talking about.

*******

The average income of the richest fifth (20%) *families* in NYC was $137k with the top 1% in 2003 averaging $233,604.

Time to get your head out of your ass. . .
SK | 01.24.08 - 5:33 pm |

Time to learn how to read a chart.

A) You're citing the numbers for families in New York State not including NYC. Look at the middle group, not the bottom group.
***My bad, didn't notice this actually. Good call****

B) blah blah blah

C) blah blah blah
JD | 01.24.08 - 6:04 pm | #
SK | 01.24.08 - 7:12 pm | #

Supporting children, their education, their welfare, and their three hundred friggin dollars, is something I actually feel good about. As a gay man, and such.
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 6:58 pm |
------------------------
Your point is well taken and I understand where you are coming from.

Let me ask you this though, do you really think this rebate idea is a good idea? Obviously the cost of living in different areas of this country can be astronomically vary.

I have no problem supporting low-income families, schools, etc. What this "stimulus" package is doing is nothing more than helping people pay off their credit card debt for a month or two to pay off Skyler's new Wii he got for Christmas. Do you really think this was meant to help struggling families?
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 7:13 pm | #

So my choosing to move from the city to a tiny town in the Midwest where I could afford a house (not even 2000 sq ft, tyvm) means that I am supposed to cry for people who choose to live in D.C. or New York? Okaaay. Not getting your logic here. We get by on less than $50K, and we work like hell for that. I don't bitch about how most of my state taxes go to Chicago, because there are more people there. You bitching because you, a single person, make way more than I have ever made in my life, and significantly more than my husband and I make together. Waah fucking waah.

I think the "stimulus" package is a complete crock, but if it keeps my friends - yes, even those poor folks in the city - from losing their housing or having their utilities shut off, I'm sure as hell not going to worry about people who are in a far better situation not getting the money. That $1200 means a lot to me, so if they're going to do this stupid thing anyway, I admit to being glad it's coming my way.

This is not the first time you've railed against helping the poor and, yes, middle class. I am grateful that I can keep my head above water. You should be, too.
reba | 01.24.08 - 7:13 pm | #

Combined, my home insurance and property taxes added another $1,080 to my monthly house payment. I am sure that between gas prices, food, and other necessities, the remainder will be easily gobbled up for this family... actually I will probably still go in the hole. I haven't had a raise in over 3 years, so I am still earning 2005 wages... which ain't much when I see what you guys call "middle class"... hell I don't even qualify as poor! $75,000 equals just over $200 every day 365 days a year... where as I make less than $90 a day! So I say tough chit! I will take my rebate with a smile and vote Democrat to thank them!
Bryan | 01.24.08 - 7:15 pm | #

Clue: $75,000 is over twice the median income for a family in the United States, and you're complaining how hard it is to be a single in NYC on that?

So move.

Cry me a fucking river.
Kes | 01.24.08 - 7:19 pm | #

scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 7:13 pm | #

Actually, I think this whole 'rebate' thingy is a general mistake. My rub with you, or anyone else bringing children into the arguement is,well, just don't do it. They are the ones going to pay for clusterfuck....seems right they get something upfront, even if its only a three hundres friggin dollars. No?
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 7:29 pm | #

I hear you John. We live in CA & pay a lot in taxes and are struggling to put two kids thru college & pay a mortgage, etc. We could use that extra money as much as anyone. I have no problem with the poor getting help, but this doesn't seem fair. And you are also right about health care. The poor get it for free. The rich can afford excellent coverage. The middle class, as you say, are on their own. The bottom line, tho, is that this give away of money will not solve the problems facing this country. It's just a temporary bandaid. We're in for a lot of pain...
lifer | 01.24.08 - 7:33 pm | #

I knew there was a reason I quit reading this blog in 2006.

Has Aravosis jumped the shark?
Ryan | 01.24.08 - 7:33 pm | #

And to those whining about 75K being rich or something.....give me a break. Making 75K in San Francisco means living check to check in a three bedroom/one bath flat with roommates. 75K ain't shit. I wouldn't dream of trying to live here on that.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 6:46 pm | #

----------------------------
Because this is where my job is. No hate for my parents at all. Parents should pay for their own kids, not me.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 7:02 pm | #

No, 75k isn't "rich", but speaking of whining... San Francisco's median *household* income is $57.8k. So there are tons of people who are able to dream of doing so. Trust me, you'd be able to do it; if not, you might want to reevaluate your lifestyle. And if you couldn't hack it, and you're unfortunate enough to have a job in the best city in the world? Move to the east bay and take BART.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 7:35 pm | #

I'm a bit sick of all these assholes complaining about the cost of living in places like New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc.

If you are making $75,000 per year, and are having trouble making ends meet, that's your fault. You either are living in the wrong city, the wrong house, or have allowed your expenses to get out of control.

If you feel the need to live near the best restaurants and museums in the country, don't be surprised when few people line up to get into your pity party.
el perro | 01.24.08 - 7:41 pm | #

Shame.
Kallisti | 01.24.08 - 7:48 pm | #

ouch! | 01.24.08 - 7:29 pm |
---------------------------
Thanks. Let me make this clear though since you don't know my history.

I have three very prolific brothers (had four but one died of AIDS). I have fourteen nieces and nephews that I love with all my heart. Half of them are already adults and one nephew has two baby daughters already. I love my family. One of my oldest nieces is finally back from two tours in Iraq. Doesn't mean I care any less about the war though.

I believe this "stimulus" package was not intended to help struggling families. It was meant to stave off a credit card crisis. Thats all.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 7:49 pm | #

Because not only these 150K have to pay taxes and regular expenses, they also have to take care of future education costs for their children and pay student loans that let them make 150K a year.

Wow. That sure would be nice. I had to pay for my own education and I am not likely to make anywhere near $75K because of it. Nor will I be able to put my kids through college. They will have to make their way like I did. I hope they make it deeper into the middle class than I've been able to. I would love to be in your situation. I just don't get why John and others feel the need to hate on people in mine. We pay our bills, bought only as much house as we could afford - with a standard mortgage, no less. We work hard and strive to make life better for our kids. People making $150 who can put money aside to help their kids go to college shouldn't be bitching about money going to those who are striving to help their kids stay fed. We aren't responsible for this stupid, stupid scheme anyway. We know who's going to pay for it, and it isn't the people with the tax lawyers.
reba | 01.24.08 - 7:57 pm | #

Jesus Christ, Aravosis. What a whiny bitch. LOL.
James | 01.24.08 - 8:03 pm | #

As an increasing number of poor folks are stripping shelves bare in our foodbanks, I don't think these folks will be wasting their pittance of a rebate. Most don't have a credit card in the first place.

Also those high-priced elitist cities where cost of living is high also have many jobs that are much higher paying than we earn out here in the boondocks. But, I like living in a loving community where most everyone cares about each other and looks out for you so I have no desire to hob nob with the pretty people in D.C. or San Francisco.
anon | 01.24.08 - 8:09 pm | #

2 years ago I made over $375k a year. My partnership dissolved and last year I lost 10k because fo the startup cost of the new business. No money for me, despite the fact I was paying 100k a year in taxes the year before. Fuck 'em all. Time for a serious change.
tas | 01.24.08 - 8:12 pm | #

Hmmm, if this is a tax rebate then shouldn't it go just to the people who paid the taxes (regardless of their income level)? It is a redistribution of wealth - a typical democrat trick - since it takes from those who paid the taxes and gives to those who didn't pay.
katablog | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 8:15 pm | #

They can keep my fucking rebate check. Doesn't mean squat to my finances.

What irks me is that these rebates should go to people that PAY taxes. WTF is up with this rebate for children? I don't have any children, don't plan on having any, and I don't feel I should subsidize them anymore than I already am (which is a LOT already).

Fuck that shit.
scottinsf | 01.24.08 - 6:30 pm |

Amen. My husband and I aren't having kids. Where's my rebate? I paid my mortgage on time. Where's my free house? Oh, wait. I forget. I'm "rich." LOL

And $75K in SF means living in a 200 sq f shit hole. I love the folks whining here on "just getting by" in their single family homes. Come live my life for a day in my tiny little overpriced apartment.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 8:18 pm | #

Tell me this: why am *I* (regardless of my income level) responsible to pay for your (regardless of income level) kids' food, housing, education or whatever.

Did I choose to have your kids? Did I choose to live where you do? Did I choose your career path?

Then why the hell do you expect that my taxes should be redistributed to you? And just for the record, no, we don't make $150K, but yes, some of the tax money we paid will be redistributed to others who didn't make it.
katablog | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 8:19 pm | #

Yeah, I live where I live because of the "museums"... not my fucking job. Whatever.
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 8:14 pm | #

So get a place in Hayward and take BART.

All these poor, poor people who are FORCED to live in the best city in the world because of their jobs... What are you, indentured servants? Yes it's expensive but we choose to be here. No, people who live in SF or NYC or DC and who make 80k are not by any means rich. But they're not Dickens characters either. Would a $300 check make a difference to them? Most likely. Should they whine about how tough life is on $75k? Sure, and I'll break out my teeny weeny violin.
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 8:30 pm | #

John A has always come across as a mean-spirited selfish person, and this is yet another example of his disposition.
Jake | 01.24.08 - 8:31 pm | #

Tell me this: why am *I* (regardless of my income level) responsible to pay for your (regardless of income level) kids' food, housing, education or whatever.
-------------------
Because....that's the system that raised you. Like it or not, 'katablog', that's your inheritance... a kingdom of responsiblity. Stop whining.
ouch! | 01.24.08 - 8:33 pm | #

I make a little over $75,000. I'm a single mother of two, both in college. I make "too much" for my children to get financial aid for school except for loans. I live in San Diego,where prices are very high. Why doesn't my family deserve a check?
Ms. M | 01.24.08 - 8:46 pm | #

Tell me this: why am *I* (regardless of my income level) responsible to pay for your (regardless of income level) kids' food, housing, education or whatever.

Why am I responsible for paying for your favorite program? And make no mistake, you have a favorite program whether you know it or not. We're all in it together, jerk.
Anon | 01.24.08 - 8:58 pm | #

dpp,

I haven't heard much "poor me" with the exception of John A's original post.
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 8:58 pm | #

Don't worry, someone poor like me won't get my hands on any of your precious lucre. I won't be getting any of this stimulus package. I only made $3000 last year. I get by with the help of friends, but it's getting really old. I'm not well enough to work full time but I don't qualify for medical assistance so I can get well. I just keep trying to take care of myself so I can get better and get a real job again.
Scilla | 01.24.08 - 9:00 pm | #

what are the rest of us supposed to do when our premiums hit $2000 a month and, God forbid, something catastrophic hits us?

Well, then you'll be poor, and elligible for help. What's the problem?
Sara | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 9:01 pm | #

Even earning $75k in Manhattan is a lot, John. Even if you're living in a "300 sq ft studio", you're still opting to live in the most expensive city in the nation and you're still probably living a lifestyle tha tsomeone making $5.15 an hour in rural podunk can't afford.

I've lived in NYC on $28k a year and lived a significantly better lifestyle than some relatives back home who make $6 an hour....
Butch | 01.24.08 - 9:14 pm | #

Be All That They Can Be
In The Pelosi Army!!!!!!!!!!

isint a surprise around this part of the world.
Friar Tuck | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 9:14 pm | #

Even in high-cost San Francisco you can get a really nice apt in a nice neighborhood for under $2000/month. Yeah that's expensive, but at $24,000/year that still means $50k+ left over from your $75k+ income.

Stop whining. It's true that your income would buy more in Flint, Michigan, but you probably couldn't make your income in Flint, either.
Nancy Irving | 01.24.08 - 9:19 pm | #

$300= 50 hours of work for someone making $6 an hour (pre-tax) - or a little over 6 days.

$300 = 8 hrs for someone making $75k, or one day.

We have a real wealth gap in this country and people who are making $75k feel "poor" but if they really had to live the lives that millions of people live, they'd thank their blessing for how wealthy they are.
Butch | 01.24.08 - 9:20 pm | #

PS - This is the first time in awhile I've actually heard someone talk about POOR people. The new hip thing to talk about is the middle class, etc.....

But, being middle class is still a privilege that millions of Americans don't have.

If you're making min wages, you're going to pay a full day's work just to fill your gas tank!
Butch | 01.24.08 - 9:21 pm | #

I agree - living in NYC, San Fran, DC, is a privilege. You want access to all the things the city has to offer, but then whine about the cost.

I moved to NYC 8 years ago...and, you know what, I realized that though I love it here, it's just not worth the "cost". I'm not blaming anyone else - it's my decision to stay or to go. I'm deciding to move somewhere more affordable because financial stability and owning a house are more important to me. I don't expect anyone to subsidize my wanting to live in the most expensive city.
Butch | 01.24.08 - 9:25 pm | #

SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 8:30 pm |
I don't live in SF you idiot. I'm actually *from* California, but I've lived in NYC and now Boston. You clearly know NOTHING about the SF market if you think that Hayward is THAT cheap. LOL

Tell Aunt Bea and Opie I said hello. I'll go to my "musueum." LOL
Just sayin' | 01.24.08 - 9:19 pm | #

OH! I'm sorry, next time I'll read every single one of your posts to make sure I have your hometown correct, you mean-spirited angry little gnat. Change "Hayward" to "Lowell" or something and "BART" to the "T", and blow it out your unpleasant ass.

Love, "Idiot".
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 9:51 pm | #

Even in high-cost San Francisco you can get a really nice apt in a nice neighborhood for under $2000/month. Yeah that's expensive, but at $24,000/year that still means $50k+ left over from your $75k+ income.
Nancy Irving | 01.24.08 - 9:19 pm | #

If rent was tax deductible it might...
SkippyFlipjack | 01.24.08 - 9:54 pm | #

I'm sorry to hear so many people made poor choices in life and ended up broke and angry and jealous of some fool who makes all of $75,000. Never heard so much whining. The people who pay the most taxes get tired of subsidizing all you "poor-me" types.

Poor choices, huh? You must assume we all started out on the same playing field. My "poor choices" included sending myself to college, moving to buy a home that I can afford where my kids can play outside without my having to watch them every second, leaving the city with its drive-bys, working hard and paying all my bills. Is the world really so rife with $75K+ jobs that every single person here, regardless of their health or family situations, can just get one by saying please? I have been working since I was 16, full time since 18, so I've paid plenty of taxes. I am not whining about the life I chose, so why the fuck should you? Oh, that's right, because if people didn't make your choices, they have no right to express their opinions.

I have said before that I think this is a mistake for the economy, but if the money is going to people who otherwise have trouble making ends meet, I see no reason why those who are not having that problem are so pissed off about it. Might as well say "Are there no poor houses? No prisons?" Go Dickens! I guess everything old is new again.
reba | 01.24.08 - 9:56 pm | #

What a colossal asshole you are.

WAAAHHH I make too much money! Poor people have it so good! Lucky duckies!

Trying out for the Wall Street Journal editorial page, John?

So many gay men are so selfish. They care about politics to the extent that it can help them. Gay marriage is the most important issue in the world. Who cares that there are people who will spend tonight trying to sleep without heat in single-digit weather because their slumlord won't fix anything. No, the real problem is that John can't marry his boyfriend.
JC | 01.24.08 - 10:45 pm | #

wow john, i just started reading yr blog again after a lengthy break, but if this is indeed not satire and you are serious, then you are so full of shit. serious wankery.
eriq | 01.24.08 - 11:32 pm | #

living in a relationship intending it to last a lifetime is meaningful and deserving of respect
nobody is entitled to special rights
nobody
afafkd | 01.24.08 - 11:37 pm | #

afafkd | 01.24.08 - 11:37 pm
================================

Special rights? Since when is the right to get married a "special right"?
Polly_Tics | Homepage | 01.24.08 - 11:42 pm | #

You are so deluded to think that 75,000 a year ISN'T that much. That is a lot of money to most people, even us educated folk in metropolitan areas. It must be nice to be as privledged as you.
shirlybeans | 01.24.08 - 11:44 pm | #

it became a special right when government got involved before that it was simply a rite and before that only a notion
afafkd | 01.25.08 - 12:03 am | #

Why not just give everybody enough to buy a house, wouldn't that solve all our problems? What is 'government by maniacs' called?
Anonymous | 01.25.08 - 12:04 am | #

AmericaBlog 2.0!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Say it like Khan.
Pinko Punko | Homepage | 01.25.08 - 12:04 am | #

Bullshit. I'm currently single and living in Brooklyn. I moved to my current, good sized 1 bedroom apartment when I was making $36k and it was plenty. Admittedly I don't have a car, my health insurance is cheap, and I have about a 50 minute commute to downtown Manhattan, but on the other hand I've never needed a roommate and was able to buy my furniture new. I'm now making $55k and feel no need to move, that's how good my apartment and my neighborhood are, so don't give me this crap about $75k making you a pauper in NYC and limiting you to a tiny studio somewhere. If that's the case then it's because you're *choosing* to live in a particularly expensive area, like Manhattan, when there are other options available.

As for me, whatever money I get from them will be nice but hardly necessary. I'm not hurting for it. That's part of the benefit of still living in the apartment you could afford at $36k when you're making $55k.
Greg | 01.25.08 - 12:29 am | #

How did this idiotic post turn into a forum for bashing equality for gay men? I'm gay, I make well under $75,000, and I have no problem with gearing this stimulus plan toward low-income workers. There are plenty of gay men out there (me and my partner included) who get by on average incomes--it's not all Queer as Folk, and if you believe everything you see on TV about gay me, you're just an idiot. Not all gay men are the same, just like all straight people are the same. I've met plenty of straight people who are just as selfish, or more so, than any gay man I've every known. Thanks, John, for reinforcing negative stereotypes yet again. I've been reading your blog faithfully for four years, but I'm out of here. You're a jerk.

And incidentally, and just because I haven't gotten the ranting out of my system yet, why would anyone opposed to equal rights for gay Americans be reading this blog in the first place?
KMR | 01.25.08 - 12:36 am | #

Yeh, John, you are right. The poor in this country have such great health care - better than the middle class!

NOT!

You really lose me when you go on these "poor me - I've got it worse than those lazy poor people - pooor mee" schticks.

What is killing the middle class is systemic shift of wealth to the very rich and the break down of rational industry, not a few hand-outs to the poor.

Witch-hunt against the poor is a losers game that plays into the hands of fascism. IMHO

So there!
mirror | 01.25.08 - 12:38 am | #

This post below says it all. Can't afford college for kids and groveling for $300 and blames her lot on people poorer than she is getting too big a share of the pie.

I make a little over $75,000. I'm a single mother of two, both in college. I make "too much" for my children to get financial aid for school except for loans. I live in San Diego,where prices are very high. Why doesn't my family deserve a check?
Ms. M | 01.24.08 - 8:46 pm | #
mirror | 01.25.08 - 12:46 am | #

Thought I'd post my budget. I was living in a small area in central NY State, living with my partner and 2 cats, making $45,000 a year and my partner made $25,000. We had enough money to live without worrying, take a vacation a year, and buy a few things like ipods. Then my partner died, and my company transferred me to the Boston area and gave me a raise to $50,000. I take home $1250 every two weeks. When he died, I lost his income. He did not leave me anything and he had no insurance for me. (yeah, we just didn't think about those things cause we were in our 30's. Lesson learned).
I searched for a long time around Boston and the cheapest rent I could find for a one bedroom apartment is $825. And this is about 30 miles out.
Rent: 825
Electric: 125 average
Cell phone but no landline (can't afford 2 phones): 60
Cable and internet: 80
Car and renters insurance: 100
Car pymt: 300 (Ford Focus 5 year loan, 4.99% which I had taken before my partner died, when my older car died. If only I had known what was coming.)
Food: about 200 to 250 a month. And this is with eating energy bars for breakfast and $1.00 microwave soup for lunch.
Cat food and litter: about 100 (1 cat has to be on a special diet due to an illness).
Gas: about 100 to 150 (10 miles to work, 25 mpg, rarely going too far from home).
Medical copays and prescriptions: about 100.
Loan I took out to pay for the move to Boston cause they wanted 1st, last, and security, getting new car registration, stuff for the apartment and an operation for my cat: 200
Okay, this leaves roughly 100 to 200 a month for everything else. Excise tax on the car, oil changes, new tires, clothing, entertainment, Vet bills, replacing things that break or repair bills, etc, etc, etc.
I frequently have no money and occasionally have to beg from my parents. I can't figure out how to do better. I have no savings, since there is nothing left to save. I tried like hell to find cheaper rent, but take a look at Craigslist and try to find a 1 bedroom in even a marginal neighborhood anywhere around Boston for less. I keep my heat around 64 degrees and I still pay about 125 a month and that is in a small apartment with hardly any appliances. No washer or dryer, no dishwasher, and it's only me using lights and showering. I could cancel Cable and Internet, but that only buys me 80 extra dollars and then I'd have nothing to do while I'm sitting in here alone. If I had known my partner was going to die (it was unexpected) I wouldn't have gotten the cats. Too late now. Getting rid of them would give me more money, but they have become my children.
So. My point. I can barely make it on 50,000. I have no idea how other people do it on less. I don't have student loans anymore and no credit card debt, so I'm actually in a better position than a lot of people, and yet I still have no money on $50,000. I go out to eat only about twice a month and this is usually to a fairly cheap restaurant. I don't go to movies and I haven't bought a new pair of shoes in 8 months. What am I doing wrong? And yet I realize I make more than (many, lots, half of ??) people. I hate to even casually complain about my situation since so many people are a lot worse off. I actually need to count my blessings.
My computer is old and tired and could die at some point soon. I would love a check from the government so I could go out and get a new one. Not to mention a vacation, paying off that loan I took out, bringing my cats to the VET to make sure they are healthy, getting a new pair of glasses, I could go on and on.
I guess 75,000 for a single person in Wash DC or NYC isn't that much more. Probably a higher tax bracket than me, higher rents, etc. Yeah, I guess I can see the point of this article. Back where I came from in Central NY, rents were much lower as was health care, insurance, and electric. NY did not have excise tax on the car (what a rotten, mean tax that is. In MA it's in one bill and you can't pay it on time, has to be all at once). But NY's sales tax is higher, so I guess it evens out in the end.
I hesitate to change jobs to either get higher pay or move to a cheaper location cause I've been with my company for many years and have built up retirement, pension, and vacation benefits, but at the same time I'm living on the edge. I guess I need advise. Hey, any single Gay guys out there willing to go out with a 40ish guy with 2 cats, living outside of Boston? :)
JH | 01.25.08 - 12:51 am | #

MANY MANY TIMES, KAROLOONATICPRIMADONNA
HAS STATED THAT THE CONTINUED PRESENCE IN IRAQ AND THE RESULTING TROOP DEATHS, IS JUSTIFIED TO MAINTAIN HER FAT-ASS STANDARD OF LIVING
Anonymous | 01.24.08 - 12:39 pm | #

Put the crack pipe down.
Jump to the Left | Homepage | 01.25.08 - 1:23 am | #

jh thx & best of luck
afafkd | 01.25.08 - 1:30 am | #

If you can't make ends meet on your 75000$ salary where you're living-- MOVE!
DKarma | 01.24.08 - 12:56 pm |

Not a bad suggestion, really, considering that I've heard the elites on here tell people who didn't like losing their construction or other jobs to illegal immigrants to MOVE if they couldn't get a job...

Horrible post. The poor, unlucky and those without 3 degrees or more should just die, I suppose.

...
Older and Wiser | 01.25.08 - 4:09 am | #

Seriously, scott,

You must be a parody. I'm sure you have to subsist on dollar tacos in the Mission, every other day. I bet you live underneath 24 hour Happy Surprise massage on Turk.
Pinko Punko | Homepage | 01.25.08 - 4:56 am | #

This post just explained something to me. Well, I knew it all along, but this proved it. WHY America is so stupid. AND why it will never change.

Most Americans would sell out their mommies for $500. Do they have any scruples? Not many. Just look at most comments here. "I liked you UNTIL you said this! How DARE you?" All for $500. They would vote GOP for a mere $500! Unbelievable!

I saw Richard Nixon do this in 1972 -- "We're gonna give all Americans $200!" (Or close to that.) And damn if he didn't get a lot of votes -- just for $200 a person!

Americans -- dumber than dog droppings.
shell5960w | 01.25.08 - 5:12 am | #

so why live in ny or dc??
Anonymous | 01.25.08 - 5:27 am | #

SK -- whoops, sorry about that then. I should follow my own advice and use a less snarky tone myself.
JD | 01.25.08 - 6:40 am | #

By the way -- JA has these little explosions every 6-12 months that alienate half his readership, often including me. Yet somehow, we do come back ...
JD | 01.25.08 - 6:42 am | #

ROTFL you were more than willing to make sacrifices when it was transpeople being thrown under the bus.

How's it feel sweetie?
Underthebus | 01.25.08 - 9:19 am | #

The idea behind giving anyone the spare change is to give manufacturers of consumer products an incentive to hire more workers as demand for their products increase. Unfortunately, since most of these jobs have been outsourced overseas, this benefit will stimulate the overseas economies, not ours. What we get out of the deal is an increased balance of payments deficit.

Outside of that, it's a great idea.
Sam Thornton | Homepage | 01.25.08 - 10:39 am | #

surprised this was never taken down?
Friar Tuck | Homepage | 03.21.08 - 7:30 pm | #

Comment Policy / Terms of Service
AMERICAblog has a large and diverse readership. We encourage free speech, and do not care if you are a Republican, Democrat, or even French. We therefore assume no responsibility for what is written in our comments sections -- the comments in this forum express solely the views of the comments' authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of AMERICAblog or any of its staff. We are interested, however, in fostering a respectful debate and community. We have therefore added site monitors to patrol the comments. The monitors will delete comments, and ban commenters, in a timely manner when we are notified that a comment violates our terms of service. Violations of our terms of service include, but are not limited to, posting comments that are perceived as: personal attacks on other members of our community; violent/threatening; bigoted/discriminatory; slanderous; hurtful to members of this community; and/or intended to disrupt the debate. Spam and "sock puppet" comments will also be deleted and banned. We also reserve the right to delete any comment, and ban any commenter, for any other reason we deem appropriate. Decisions are final, and not open to debate. By posting in our comments you agree to accept and abide by these terms.

Commenting by HaloScan.com