Thanks for your response, but as D_Odds mentions, I would lump these all together under “maximizing return”, all other factors included.
I agree that immediate ROI is not the only possible strategy, but I would classify avoiding taxation, etc., as pretty much the same thing as maximizing return.
Maybe just a semantic difference.
We return you now to your regularly scheduled flame fest.
Regards,
Shodan
I agree with both you and D_Odds also. I’d argue that you can have myriad investment strategies whereby you maximize something, but it isn’t always ROI. But yeah, the difference is maybe a little more than semantic and a little less than important.
I was just looking to get a little dig in before I went off to a meeting, is all.
As I tried to point out earlier, a large chunk of this is likely coming from those who use my agency’s services. Remember how the Clinton administration balanced the budget? They raided my agency’s profits to do so.
Wow, two people agree with me in the same thread! This is a first. I better go record this on my Myspace page…
if I actually had one
I’m not a fan of this rebate – I don’t think lump sum payments are as effective as simply lowering taxes on the lowest tax brackets (and raising them on the highest to keep from deepening the deficit). I also think we’re going to be better off economically in the long run if we stop trying to avoid a recession at all costs and just take our medicine in the short term.
That said, though, the simple fact that it gets someone as nasty and unpleasant as Carol Stream so upset is an automatic upside. I think I’ll write my senator and ask them to pass a rider wherein the government seizes all of her assets and uses them to buy free food for homeless people, served under a banner of a smiling Jesus holding hands with minorities. That would be cool.
Bless her heart, she means well.
Pretty angry for a chick.
Good thinking…except you spelled my name wrong. Also, that’s not my address.
Just pointing out that you have capitalized the name of Jesus, your own name, and even the word “Republican”. For a reasonable consistency, you might consider capitalizing “God” when you use is as a proper name. Suppose, for example, you were talking about Rock Hudson, would you write “the immortal son of rock”?
As for the OP, it isn’t a rebate, but not for the reason you’re stating. It isn’t a rebate because it isn’t the money you paid. It’s newly printed money, backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government.
Spend it while it will still buy a loaf of bread.
It’s a stupid idea aimed at the economically-illiterate masses. It was stupid the last time 'round, and it is stupid this time around.
How is it useful to give people some portion of their 2007 income tax refunds early? What happens when they bump into FY 2008, file their returns for 2007, and find diminished returns (due to the “prebate”).
Is there a way to officially tell the feds to fuck their check? So that it does not count as being paid? I suppose that if it is left un-cashed that it won’t count?
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Yes, people do invest for those reasons as well. But saying that “maximizing return must share priority with other societal needs” as claimed by Fear Itself is not true factually, nor an opinion I would agree with.
Sure, if you define “investing” only as an activity with a personal economic return.
Oh, don’t worry on that account. The Senate is already talking about adding more people to the so-called “rebate”, such as seniors on SocSec. What I don’t understand is the whole concept of people expecting money for nothing. What’s next, tax “rebates” for illegal immigrants? Why not give tax “rebates” to the citizens of France, at that point?
Look, I think the OP has stumbled on to one very narrow and legitimate point. For those who don’t pay income taxes, it is a little misleading to call the check a “rebate.”
But fudging the meaning of some word is hardly the worst error in the world. I’m sure Carol Stream is often referred to as a “lady,” when what is really meant is “zealously dumb cunt.”
Ya don’t say.
By the way, how exactly can this both your opinion and a fact at the same time?
In other words, Ravenman’s analysis for the win.
[shrug] If you earn money within U.S. borders, the IRS don’t much care to see your green card.
Oh, God, no! Not the old people!! Keep Carol’s money out of their filthy, greedy, wrinkly hands!!!
I would also like to subscribe to the Giraffe newsletter. Thanks for pointing out the silver lining on this dull gray cloud of retardosity. I think I’ll write my senator/future President Obama* and ask him to vote Yes on that rider.
*Gratuitous wishful thinking, I know. Can’t resist, in such a stupid thread.
Another reading impaired poster. It’s neither my opinion, nor a fact. I want to know where people get off stating that "“maximizing return MUST share priority with other societal needs”. That’s bullshit.
No, keep the money out of the hands of those that would redistribute it according to their leftist political agenda.