[sceptic]

in the Uk, you can get welfare (aid, call it what you will (I believe it is a family credit)) if you earn under the paltry sum of approx £60,000 joint income.................... Sometimes, I think politicians do not have a clue what a poor person is and they certainly have no idea how many extra beers someone on an income of £50,000 plus can get with the money they give them each month......... Systems are made by the governments and they come into place to win votes. what a sad state of affairs

giving everyone £500 ( or what ever to boost the economy is great), but to spend it the only people that profit are the ones with the goods to sell or the money to enjoy it. these are definatey not the poor

all it is for is to appease the whinging rich lobbyists who are worried they may only make 1.9 billion profit not the 2 billion they projected for thier companies

[Winstonm]

Quote

all it is for is to appease the whinging rich lobbyists who are worried they may only make 1.9 billion profit not the 2 billion they projected for thier companies

Exactly. And this "downside earnings surprise" will cause their stock price to fall, causing even more grief to the well-heeled. Probably have to give them some more supply-side tax breaks just to stop the whining.

[Codo]

I really love this questions.
And to come back to the original theme:

1. If I would receive an additional 500 € from my governement, I won't spend more money, so this won't stimulate the economy.

2. My governement try to stimulate the economy with all sorts of subsidies. I believe that they would stimulate the economy if they are able to direct theses subsidies to the right receivers. But this is just a fealing, I have no background knowledge, whether this ever happened to have success.

Some further comments: A big school of thinking in economy says that it is great if the governement takes credits to spend money. The more money they spend, the more the economy will grow. And a bigger economy pays more taxes so that they will earn money in the long run. The theory is great, but I lack to see that this works.
I believe that they should spend just the money they have. But maybe I am just old fashioned.

[Al_U_Card]

Can you say, "Value for money"? As in = supply vs demand - speculation.

[Al_U_Card]

With the vast majority of world-wide financial transactions being exchange related, a lot of our inconsistencies come from traders pushing different currencies to make a buck. Determine standards of living etc. and base the currencies on non-speculative metrics. Better yet, determine value in terms of time worked (or services rendered) and use that as the medium of exchange. Confused yet? You wouldn't need to be if people couldn't get rich by chipping away at the value of your assets.

[rbforster]

kenberg, on Jan 19 2008, 09:51 AM, said:

I expect that many of you, like myself, would put the $500 in the bank. which will be nice for us but will not stimulate the economy.

Don't worry. Mr Bernanke just made it almost 1% less rewarding to save that money yesterday, as an added inducement to go blow your $500.

[Al_U_Card]

The Federal Reserve is the only private company that people seem to think is government "controlled". Of course they operate based on their own principles and not for the common weal.