Nothing like going on the air and reporting the government is going to give you a check for x dollars - depending on your income - to please your viewers. But reporting about it as if there were no strings attached isn't straightforward.
However, the glowing reception the $150-billion taxpayer-funded stimulus plan got from each of the network newscasts gave that impression last night.
"Cash is on the way," ABC's "World News" anchor Charles Gibson said. "The check is in the mail, or it will be to 117 million Americans. The president and congressional leaders reached agreement on a $150-billion economic stimulus package today. When passed by Congress, the package will result in the distribution of $100 billion to individuals and families. And it will mean businesses will get $50 billion in tax breaks."
All that sounds great, except that some people who pay taxes won't get a rebate, and many of those who don't pay taxes at all will get a rebate.
This money given to non-taxpayers has to come from somewhere - and as many economists have pointed out, that wealth-redistribution characteristic is a reason why this package isn't a good "stimulus."
"A stimulus bill is not the place to expand government interference in the economy, bail out banks that make bad loans, or pile on unrelated new spending," wrote Rea S. Hederman, Jr., assistant director and senior policy analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation. "While a tax rebate may be inevitable at this point, the public should recognize that this rebate is poorly targeted and would not have a significant effect on the economy."
CBS's Katie Couric and NBC's Brian Williams also welcomed the news. They lauded it because it was a "bipartisan" effort and thus treating that as a net positive.
"Well, it's not quite a done deal yet, but it looks like many of you will be getting a rebate check from Uncle Sam," Couric said on the January 24 "Evening News." "In the biggest show of bipartisanship since 9/11, President Bush and the House leadership reached agreement today on an economic stimulus package."
"[T]he threat of a recession in this country is just dire enough to have brought both parties together in Washington," Williams said on the January 24 "Nightly News." "They've put together what is called a stimulus package and that means over the next few months most of the people watching this broadcast tonight will get a check in the mail. Now, it's what Americans choose to do with that money that will then affect the U.S. economy or not."
None of the networks attempted to explain where this $100 billion in checks will come from.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Not only is it the usual BS
January 25, 2008 - 21:45 ET by robert108Not only is it the usual BS redistributionism, the entire concept of a "tax break" is false. It presumes that there is some standard level of taxation, when the reality is that it's arbitrary. Lower tax rates aren't a "break", then; they're just the right thing to do when the govt takes too much from the achievers. BTW, another term for corporations and businesses is "employers".
Bingo.
January 25, 2008 - 23:55 ET by GregEBingo.
And so....
January 25, 2008 - 21:49 ET by c5thenInstead of an economic slow down and anemic growth with a $250 billion deficit, we will have an economic slow down and anemic growth with a $350 or $400 billion deficit. But, at least a lot more people will be able to watch the MSM news talk about the "recession" on their new Hi-Def TV's.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Yep, because the government
January 25, 2008 - 23:54 ET by GregEYep, because the government manadate of the elimination of analog television signals upcoming means they'll have to have that TV ya know. It's a right, it's an absolute need, life cannot go on without the big screen TV here in America.
Socialism is Crapism.
What a bunch of crap it is
January 25, 2008 - 23:52 ET by GregEWhat a bunch of crap it is in the first place. "Rebate?" If it was a "rebate" then those who paid no taxes would get no check. But since many will, it's not a "rebate."
Interesting, someone who's income is over $87,000, and who's paid their large tax bill won't get SQUAT, while someone who paid nothing in taxes will get a check. What freakin planet am I on??
Do we live in America, or the freakin land of Oz? Do people not see throught this nonsense? Answer: Nope, they sure don't. They chuckle about it as if "oh well, if that's what they're gonna do, that's what they're gonna do." Once again politicians look at themselves as Kings and Queens, and many Americans look at them the same way.
Rebates par dux
January 26, 2008 - 00:53 ET by Lame CherryI would add Greg that for some reason I have never run into a poor Republican who didn't pay taxes ever getting a rebate check either. For some reason, only liberals get checks.
Not one poor person who voted for the GOP in the last rebate got one red cent while liberals by flocks got the checks.
No one seems to ever write about how that comes about and how that money targets only specific groups who will buy certain venues which line the pockets of the same hucksters who "stimulated" the economy last time while pocketing those billions off the Franklin spending sheep.
I actually would love to see one of these checks as I have never seen one sent to my family, friends, associates or business partners. For some reason poor or wealthy we only get notices we owe the government more money.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
I demand liberals donate their rebates AGAIN
January 26, 2008 - 00:46 ET by Lame CherryI remember well a liberal in Ohio bitching about President Bush the last time he gave away these rebates to stimulate the economy. I informed them as they hated Bush that they should just give the money back so the government could give it to people who liked Bush.
Amazingly the IRS and Treasury after my blogs pleading for liberals to donate money from evil George Bush never got one dollar back........the liberals kept all the money from evil George Bush.
So again I demand all the people who have attacked George Bush from Hugh Fitzgerald to that idiot Lee Woodward on HuffPo with Robert Shearer to donate all of the rebate they will be getting AGAIN to a fund or to me. I will set up a Paypal account to save them from their guilt, anxiety and frustration of George Bush once again forcing these poor rich people from having to deal with taking money from someone they hate so much, hate his success in Iraq and hate his being elected president.
I know.........not one dollar will be donated again as liberals all think money is free and theirs and green is the only color those racists ever go color blind on.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
....."this rebate is poorly
January 26, 2008 - 07:10 ET by motherbelt....."this rebate is poorly targeted, and will not have a significant effect on the economy." The Heritage Foundation
Ah, but they don't realize that doesn't matter. What matters is that they are trying to do something...they have good intentions...they care
That's what's important....
<sarc off>
The rebate checks in 03 were
January 26, 2008 - 13:02 ET by jcrapes4The rebate checks in 03 were more of an interest free loan. The child tax credit was expanded from 600 dollars to 1000 dollars. They sent out the difference in a check. When you filed your tax return for that year only you had to subtract the amount of the tax check. That did not bother me, but when the government says I will be getting another rebate check I wonder does that mean for 08 I get 2 refund checks and none in 09? If so I would rather not get the damn thing:)