How About Stimulous Coupons Instead of Stimulous Checks
By irisheyes
@irisheyes (4370)
United States
March 6, 2009 1:53pm CST
The government tried once under Bush to stimulate the economy and get money circulating by issuing stimulous checks. Now it appears that that will be tried again.
Unfortunately, many and maybe most Americans who got those checks immediately deposited them in the bank. That didn't do too much to stimulate the economy but it seems to be ingrained middle class thinking to save when money seems to be freezing up.
I was thinking it might work better if, instead of checks, people were given coupons that they could spend. Coupons that could only be used for certain things that everyone could easily acquire and that would expire in 60 days. The stores could redeem the coupons at any bank that took bailout money and the bank would bee reimbursed by the government with no extra charges for service. (They took bailout money)
Coupons couldn't be used for necessary items such as food or shelter since those who can afford those things would use the coupons and save the money that would have gone toward them. In a lot of cases, that would not put any more money in circulation.
Coupons would have to be used for some thing fairly discretionary. I thought maybe electronics would b good. Every American would receive a $300 or $500 coupon to spend on any electronic item they desired. It could be put toward a computer or used to buy a number of smaller items or even gift items.
I know this sounds hairbrained at first but think about it. People who are delaying buying big ticket items might decide to do it if they could get an additional $300-500 off. Those who don't need anything and weren't planning on buying anything would come up with something to buy. Not many of those coupons would go to waste and it would probably put a lot more money on the street than checks that go right into the bank.
I know some think that we can't buy our way out of a recession or a depression but the reality is we can. In fact spending is the only way out. What we can't do is save our way out of it and it seems a waste of government resources to send people money to stimulate the economy if all they are going to do is put the money in the bank (or under the mattress as may soon be the case).
Anybody have anything to add. If you think my idea stinks, let's hear your idea.
1 person likes this
5 responses
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
7 Mar 09
I don't know about having to buy electronics, but a debit card of sorts would be a possible solution. I wouldn't limit what people could buy simply because necessities may be a priority for some especially those who find themselves on hard times.
2 people like this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
7 Mar 09
I like that idea. A debit card of some sort would allow people to choose from a variety of things and would eliminate certain manufacturers raising prices as another poster brought up. But I think necessities such as food would have to be a no no. It would mean that people who already had food money would save the money and use the debit card. That would not put more money in circulation. The whole idea here is to get money in circulation and not to save it so we can help the economy. Also the debit card would have to be given an expiration date since we need to loosen the economy as quickly as possible. But overall, that's a GREAT idea. I wish I'd thought it through to that and I'm giving the best response to you for it. Thanks.
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
7 Mar 09
Well, thank you. 
We obviously know that stimulating the economy takes going to the people and not the banks. It would have eventually found its way to them but the people would have benefited from it first.
We obviously know that stimulating the economy takes going to the people and not the banks. It would have eventually found its way to them but the people would have benefited from it first.@irishidid (8687)
• United States
8 Mar 09
I don't think there should be a limit on what people buy or where they buy it. Of course they would be more likely to buy at discount stores if the amount is too low. I also don't want to give the government the idea that they know how to spend our money better than we do. Cause we sure know that's not true.
@jonesy123 (3948)
• United States
6 Mar 09
There wouldn't be much fairness in it, because not everybody will have use for those items, period. And buying it, storing it, in order to resell it? What market would be there for it? Furthermore, prices on those items would have to be frozen as soon as even rumors start about what items will be picked. Look at the converter boxes. They used to be about $40 to $50 when they started to sell them. Now they are $60 to $70. That little government coupon is suddenly not worth as much, is it now?
And why electronic items? How many US jobs do you actually safe with that? Most of that stuff is produced elsewhere.
BTW, checks were handed out three times under Bush. Looks like the first two times worked fine.
And does the Obama trick really work? "If you think my idea stinks, let's hear your idea." Does that work to shut up the opposition? Didn't work for him;)
Anyhow, my idea, they should have handed out bigger checks. Instead of giving money to the banks in the financial bailout or even now again with the new stimulus bill to whatever weird project, give it to the people. The financial bailout would have given my family, if it would have gone per capita, about $11k (double, if you take the new package into account). Yes, part of it would have gone to paying down debt and savings (didn't the banks want money anyway?), but it would have relieved a burden off my family and encouraged us to spend. It would have helped those people facing foreclosure and it would have given the real estate market a boost as people would have had money for a down payment. People also may have bought new cars. But they definitely would have splurged more on other items. Instead... well, where exactly did the money go or will it go? How much does it do for the individual person? Exactly, nothing. So, will a little $500 electronics coupon.
2 people like this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
7 Mar 09
Jonesy, you brought up a good point about the dager of certain manufacturer's raising the price because they thought they could. someone else on here suggested a debit card of some wort which I wish I had come up with because it is an excellent idea. That way people could use the money for a variety of things and no one manufacturer would be favored. The only things would be that it couldn't be for necessities and it would have an expiration date.
The idea is get money into circulation to help get our economy rolling again. It is not to give people money that they can save or money for necessities that they would buy anyway. The checks that Bush gave did very little to helpstimulate the economy because so many people used them for necessities or saved the money. If they had been successful, we might not be in the mess we currently are in.
$300-500 may not seem like a lot but if you times it by several tens of millions and almost the ENTIRE amount is put into circulation within a short period, it could jump start the economy much more than all the millions of dollars given so far did because that money was not circulated quickly and it may cases it was banked and not circulated at all.
When money gets tight and recession looms, there is a strong tendency to start saving. That makes money tigher and the situation more dire. It's a vicious cycle and giving money to epople can only alleviate the situation if the money is put into circulation which is why the Bush checks did not help and the Obama checks will not either. All I'm propsing is that we creat a situation where the money has to be either circulated or forfeited. The idea is to help they economy NOT to help people save for a rainy day. The rainy day is here right now.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
7 Mar 09
I don't think your idea stinks, not at all! I'm not sure electronics is the best idea, but that doesn't mean I think it "stinks" either...lol! Seriously, I understand what other posters have said about how everybody doesn't have use for electronics coupons, but at the same time I know someone like my late mother or my mother-in-law would simply give their coupons to one of the kids or grandkids who could use it.
I definitely believe the money must be spent to do any good for the economy and also that a few hundred here and there isn't going to cut it, at least it's certainly ot going to stimulate the economy much on its own. Why not really go for broke - since we ARE broke anyway - and give everyone a REAL amount of money to spend? Also, none of this crap where if you normally don't have to file income taxes you have to do so in order to get your little pittance, that costs more money in paperwork than it's worth. Give everybody a check or a coupon and be done with it. Maybe there could also be an added incentive or stimulus where, for example, if someone buys a new vehicle they'll get an additional coupon or discount towards that purchase. If I were given several thousand dollars and was told if I put that towards a vehicle I'd get another couple hundred bucks off, that just might be enough to make me go for it and maybe even spend more on a vehicle than I would have otherwise. There are different ways to go to help make sure everyone benefits in the best way for them and to help the businesses that need the help the most.
Annie
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
7 Mar 09
Annie, The idea of electronics was just all I could come up with so I threw it out there. I think that IrishIdid came up with a much better idea.
Much as I wish we could get a lot more money, I don't think it's realistic to expect that but the important thing would be to get the money on the streets ASAP. For that reason, a check will never work because people will just do what large numbers have done with the extra checks that have already been given. They will bank the check and it will not help the economy.
The trick is to get money to be spent for non essential things. Most folks are already managing food and shelter and would only save what they already have set aside for those things and use the coupons making the amount of money in circulation the same. Also the debit card (really good idea) would have to have an expiration date.
A small amount times many millions put quickly into circulation could jump start things better than all the money that has been horded away from checks that have already been issued.
Also, it would be okay to buy things for somebody else or even let somebody else use the card. The idea is only to help the economy and it doesn't matter how the money is spent or who spends it. What matters is that it is quickly put into circulation and it is over and above what would be spent anyway.
PS I have another idea for the economy but I fear Rush's people might hunt me down if I dare post it. lol
@williamjisir (22819)
• China
9 Mar 09
Hello irisheyes. Currently, the capital city of the province where I work, Zhejiang Province, China, is now issuing some coupons for tourism industry in Hangzhou as a way of stimulating the economy that is depressing. So is the same in our local supermarkets. I think that it is an effective way of stimulating the economy to make money circulate in a proper way. But for me, I am more interested in the coupons issued in the local supermarkets as food is more practical to me. Thank you for your discussion. Take care, friend.
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
9 Mar 09
Very interesting. Thanks for posting this. Unfortunately, if you got food coupons, you might just save the money you would have spent on food and that would not put any more money in circulation. Although I'd agree that the food coupons would be more practical and useful, I think that the tourism coupons probably provide more stimulous to the economy.
@MysticTomatoes (1053)
• United States
16 Mar 09
The problem with Bush's stimulus is that so many people, myself included, had better things to spend that money on. Yeah, my husband and I would have loved to have a nice big TV for our bedroom, but the fact was that our daughter needed clothes and food. We also needed clothes and food. Our rent check was still due. Our light bill had to be paid. Our car notes were still due. Many people like my husband and I couldn't afford to go out and blow that money on something frivilous when there were other bills that had to be paid.
The coupon idea might work. Everyone eats, right? How about giving us all pre-paid debit cards or maybe like you said coupons that can ONLY be used for certain types of foods. The Red Cross Katrina card scandal comes to mind as they did not put a limit on what the money could be used for. We had people buying cars and big screen TVs with that money rather than actually buying food or using the money to put on a downpayment on an apartment or buying clothes for the kids.
Otherwise, there isn't much anyone can do to stimulate the economy when it seems like no matter what any of us do, our income gets smaller and smaller while our bills get bigger and bigger.
