Social Question

12_func_multi_tool's avatar

Concerning the stimulus checks that some get, wouldn't it be better to offer investment money?

Asked by 12_func_multi_tool (803points) March 4th, 2010

I know this must be irrelavent since I’ve never heard of it but in me but what if instead of distributing free money the gov’t gave out matching funds for investment. For example an average family invests $300 then it is matched with $300. It would have a cap so high income people wouldn’t become a super investor. The macro economics is fuzzy to me, including all economics honestly. What are the holes in this?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

18 Answers

jrpowell's avatar

Isn’t matching investments the same as handing out free money? The fact is most of the people that need help don’t invest money. My mom is broke as fuck and gets 700 bucks a month from disability. You give her two hundred and fifty bucks and that money is spent in a few days on shoes and medicine. What the fuck does adding money to the stock market do to increase job creation? Sure, it make some really rich people richer. But it really does nothing unless you manufacture fancy cars and yachts.

I see this stupid shit all the time. Cut taxes for small businesses and they will make jobs. But you don’t increase supply to make demand. That is just dumb. You hire more people when you need to output more.

I had a small business and guarantee that I wouldn’t hire anyone for a small tax break. I don’t need to pay someone to pretend to do non-existent work. And if the demand is there I will hire a new person to do it.

The point is you give the extra to people that you know will put it directly back into the economy.

12_func_multi_tool's avatar

I’m trying to make it better. I see that this is nothing but a handout to you. I’m just following the common sense rules that are preached by layman, investor and gov’t themselves. Have a saving; no defecit; curb spending. those are the common sense things that I’ve heard of. If you can tell me otherwise, that’s ok. I’d rather someone invest in AT&T than buy a new iPod with their money. I’m not trying to pull a fast one on any income level. In addition it’s hypocritical that Congress increases the deficit every year while at the same time passes balanced budget bills annually for as long as I can remember, then worse urges citizens to save then gives them a handout and says enjoy Economist do the same

12_func_multi_tool's avatar

And can I ask exactly who promotes this working class hero stuff?

jrpowell's avatar


I tried to respond without profanity personal attacks and failed.

Blackberry's avatar

The average american doesn’t know how to invest, and I’m sure we want the money anyways.

Cruiser's avatar

The whole idea and goal of the stimulus funds is for you to spend it! Then all that money circulating in our economy would/could/should get business moving again which would create the much needed jobs and generate the tax dollars cities are starving for.

iphigeneia's avatar

The point of stimulus money is to stimulate the economy. Therefore, it is not serving its purpose if it is sitting around collecting interest. The theory is that giving people money to spend not only supports those struggling financially, but also helps businesses to continue operating when customers would otherwise be at home sitting on their wallets.

Judi's avatar

The economy is stimulated when money trades hands. If you just sock it away it does nothing to stimulate the economy. A stimulus works best when given to people most likely to spend it. If you just put it in the stock market it does not achive the stimulus goal. Get it?

john65pennington's avatar

Can’t you just see trying to explain this “investment money” to a drug dealer. first, he would laugh in your face. second, his “investment money” is right there in his pocket. drug dealers have been known to carry thousands of dollars on their person at one time.

scamp's avatar

@john65pennington I don’t understand your answer. When did drug dealers start paying taxes?

CMaz's avatar

It is Nickel and Dime.

Humoring (distracting) the little people. So the banks can get their cut.

Pair of jeans, a dinner out. A new bowl for the dog. Yea, that is going to stimulate the economy.

I really think nothing of it or I get pissed off.

lucillelucillelucille's avatar

Investing sends money straight to Wall St,while consuming stimulates the enomy on the local level,which is far superior.I know how to spend my money better than the government does…and yours too,if you’ll just give it to me :)

ETpro's avatar

Our current problem is not that the uber rich are too poor, but that the middle class is tapped out and liad off. Those with money to invest are either holding it, or investing offshore where returns are better. In the last year, US corporations have doubled their cash reserves while continuing to lay off staff.

Handing our trickle-down money to the rich is the Republican mantra for a universal cure, but unless you are among the richest of Americans, you need to know that that mantra is designed to support the corporatocracy and convert a once vibrant middle calss into a support mechanism for oligarchy. Trickle down has had 32 years to work now, and look where it has gotten us.

thriftymaid's avatar

No. Stimulus fund are distributed to encourage spending, not saving.

JLeslie's avatar

@ETpro Well said. I am stunned how many middle class Republicans around me think they will do better if the rich get to keep more money in their pockets.

ETpro's avatar

@JLeslie True. It ought to be obvious that if a political party plans to shovel money to the rich, it can’t come from the rich. It has to come from the middle class or the poor. And that is what the Republican Party, particularly since Reagan, has been about doing. It’s quite a comedy, crying about “Transfer of wealth” while shoveling money from those who have little to those who are already rolling in it.

Since Reagan took office, the bottom 80% in wealth have gone from owing 18.7% of America to owning 15.0%. That wealth has been transferred to those already wealthy. I am not anti wealth. I own a small business and am doing my best to get rich. But I am against rigging the game so that the poor and middle class lose what little they have in order to make people who are already rich richer. Let them figure out how to increase their wealth on their own. They have already shown they don’t need government help.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther