Give everyone in the United States 1 million dollars
By charblaize
@charblaize (1026)
United States
December 20, 2009 8:49pm CST
If Obama gave everyone just 1 million dollars, I feel the economy would be back to good, people would have invested, bought things that would have gave people work (stores, constructions, factories) some may use it wisely, others may have wasted but it would have brought our economy back help the poor and screw the companies that used it for PARADISE TRIPS and still went bankrupt what the heck, help the ones that pay his darn salary and the damn taxes. He isn't helping our country at all and making us farther into debt, recession/depression mode, lying worse than other president that has been in office. I am not happy with him and glad I didn't vote for him. I still don't understand why people don't want to impeach him when he hasn't done NOTHING but make things worse for us and continues to get worse.
10 responses
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
21 Dec 09
I can't remember the guy's name, but I seen him on a news show back after Obama first signed the huge stimulus bill. He had an idea like this. It's Chris something -- the man whom Will Smith's character in The Pursuit of Happyness was based.
He suggested that, instead of bailing out businesses and rewarding bad behavior, you instead give 1,000,000 to adults who meet a certain criteria: Must be a taxpayer; must be a citizen; must have held a job recently; non-felon (I think); 18 and over; only 1 person per household; and a few other criterion that an individual/family would have to meet for the money, which, for all intents and purposes, is a loan from the government (since they want to play the role of a bank and want our hard work to pose as collateral in some weird twist on economic sanity).
I think the rough guesstimate was somewhere in the neighborhood of 20,000,000 people that would have ended up getting the money.
Maybe my math is wrong, but that's still 20,000,000,000,000 dollars! That's still more debt than we're in now.
Of course, you can see how it would have an immediate impact. The housing industry: cured. Automotive industry: cured. Small businesses: insane boost! Even health insurance would be much more easily cured.
But it would still be more money than we're really able to have in circulation and be in debt. I admit that I don't know a whole lot about economics, but common sense suggests that it's a recipe for disaster and, moreover, an actual reason for government to go wild with tax hikes and control in the future.
But I did agree fully with the idea of giving money to the actual people instead of businesses. Don't get me wrong, I'm not for the "nanny state" concept in any way, shape or form. But if you're "giving" all the money and entitlements and everything else away then, by all means, give it to the deserving.
I think 100,000 and a far better housing foreclosure protection fund would have had the same effect and would have only cost a fraction (2.5 trillion or so) compared to the million.
However, it makes total sense that they didn't go that route. After all, it's the government we're talking about. The government needs us to need them. I believe government is the fastest-growing thing in America these days. We pay for it, so we're essentially bailing them out. They, like the shoddy companies that should have went bankrupt, have no true incentive to change their bad behavior.
Maybe I'm overly cynical, but I do not see even ONE thing from this government that suggests to me they want to help. Everything seems--once you get past the surface and stop drooling over Obama's deep, rich speaking tone and fit physique--a mere play for more power and more control and more government.
They can at least do more to help small businesses instead of large businesses (which, ironically, progressive liberals claim to be against lol). I hear tell of Obama doing things for these small businesses but, to date, I don't know exactly what they are.
Still waiting for things to get better on my end. This is the second year in a row that my family and I won't be celebrating the holidays like before because we simply can't afford it. When that's the idea of "cutting back" or the proverbial belt tightening, you know things are sdrawkcab ssa.
1 person likes this
@livewyre (2450)
•
21 Dec 09
Is Matersfish two different people?? Looks like one person to me and also is speaking some sense - Matersfish has grasped that although the situation is not ideal, just throwing that sort of money at people is:
1)only possible in the realm of the simpleton
2)would have no positive effect on the economy...
If you have to impose all those directions on people:
You must buy insurance, you must buy a car, you must do this and that - you may as well just cut out the middleman and go direct...
One of the problems that hit the economy was that people were able to be sold mortgages that they couldn't possibly pay - this was the basis of the sub-prime market collapse.
I don't want to be overly critical, the policies were badly sold, but the buyers should take some of the blame for not understanding that they were getting in over their heads. Your proposal now rewards these people by making them millionaires - these people who already have shown an inability to understand finance.
I dunno, I think maybe you're just looking for a reaction - in which case, this is a smart post - however if not... oh man did you say you have a VOTE!!!
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
21 Dec 09
There, You two are understanding what I meant and how it would have been better to give to the people (of course stipulations) whether not that much but you knew what I had in mind. Help those deserving, the people that help pay his salary and the cabinet instead of giving to the businesses that went on trips and didn't put towards the company. The economy isn't getting any better in my opinion, people are still getting laid off, companies not hiring, closing, no one has money to purchase things so stores are not doing well, people are having hard time paying for basic nessessities (electric, heating, shelter, gas) because they are laid off, unemployed yes some because of circumstances, others who knows. Viciscious cycle. Glad to see you two understand what I was talking about.
Just a discussion.
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
21 Dec 09
I forgot to add this point up there with Chris' idea, so I'll amend it right quick.
Some of the stipulations on the money given included paying down your debt if you had any outstanding: housing, cars, credit cards, medical, school loans, etc. That would be first and foremost. And, I believe, you would also have to purchase an American car outright and an insurance policy for yourself and your family.
Basically, the idea of the money was to spend the money on what were necessities in the country. You would enter into a binding agreement before receiving the money, stating that you would spend it on these things. Save or spend what's left on whatever you want, but this money wasn't going to people in order to bid on a lock of Elvis' hair or to buy a high-rollers' package at the Wynn in Vegas.
The money was going to be given in order to be circulated where it most needed to go, and that's why I didn't balk at the idea.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
21 Dec 09
If everyone in the U.S. had 1 million dollars, no one would go to work anymore so businesses would have to shut down, stores would not get deliveries, transportation would come to a standstill and eventually we wouldn't be able to buy anything with all that money.
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
21 Dec 09
I'm not so sure about that. I think there would still be those who would want to work. Of course you'd have the ones who would sit on their butts all day but I imagine they're doing that even now. I can't quite equate being rich with being lazy. Some rich people work extremely hard.
@Koriana (302)
• United States
21 Dec 09
ummm....beleive me, if the gov 't gave me a million dollars, my boss wouldn't see me again, and probably wouldn't see alot of his crew!
there's probably alot more like us.
so, well, where would you spend all that money, if the cashiers and stockers at wal mart are all millionaires who said heck with stocking shelves for $9 an hour?
but then I would probably be exploring some other income opportunities that are stashed away in the back of my mind, and I imagine that there's alot of other creative people out there that have ideas in the back of their mind that they'd love to have the time and money to invest in also...so, hey, down time wouldn't be a complete waste. probably see some really neat inventions coming out of it.
@livewyre (2450)
•
21 Dec 09
There is a reason that you are ranked fairly lowly in Politics, however I am sure it is a policy that could get just about anyone elected... I dread to think what your rating for 'economics' would be though...?
Simply put, Govt can only spend revenue that it generates through some sort of tax - so ALL we would need is a way in which we can tax a million dollars out of everybody first, then we would be all clear to distribute a million dollars to everyone!
If that sort of money actually existed (ie. a million spare dollars for every US citizen), the dollar would be worth peanuts....
How would he be impeached?? for what exactly?? by definition you can't impeach someone who has done nothing!!
But as you say 'I don't understand...' and I think that sums it up
You may not remember but Obama wasn't president when all those companies went bankrupt... I bet he's devestated that you're not happy with him..
@livewyre (2450)
•
22 Dec 09
OK, it was just a thought, but one of those that really seems a bit short-sighted. First off - where does this tremendous amount of money come from?? (the Govt get their money from the taxpayers who you are proposing this money goes to...)
Secondly, the only option would be to print the money which would devalue the dollar making the gesture valueless and ruining the US economy at the same time. Don't forgetv that the dollar is the closest thing to a global currency - you just can't do this if you want to keep the dollar in this privileged position.
Thirdly, there's the whole issue of what people would do with such stupid amounts of money - likely that they would walk away from their jobs, leaving companies bereft of their workforce, they will go on holiday - pushing much of the money abroad, and any sensible ones will save the money and therefore it would not work it's way into the economy at all.
All in all - it's an idea...it's just the type of idea you have, then kick yourself for being daft and forget about it...
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
27 Dec 09
where are they getting all this other money at? taking away from all us hardworkers, low income that dont make much anyhow and using all the taxes they say are for schools, roads, towns, cities, that we never see used anyhow for what they are to be used for? Our national debt keeps rising along with groceries, gas, clothing, shelter, utilities but no one can afford it with minimum wage. The cabinet and President always have money for these things and don't care about us little people. They keep finding more money for the wars and their raises. They have money put back in various funds they could use for "other" I'm sure. This was just a thought to see how many people would respond, react, agree or disagree. Nothing that will ever come into action or we all would be very happy....
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
22 Dec 09
Hey, this was just a thought, why throw money away to companies that couldn't stay afloat and the people making the economy get shafted. I am not that into politics and have only posted a few topics in here. Obama gave the money to the companies and then they went on vacation. Obama has done some things that other Presidents would be impeached on. As I have stated before, I just wanted peoples thoughts on this subject to see how they felt not raise cain. I personally didn't vote for Obama.
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
22 Dec 09
That idea makes too much sense to give it any serious consideration!
We could have saved billions if they would have done that--business would be thriving, some people would have invested it and retired to live on the interest from it, homes would have been paid off and the real estate industry and banks would be healthy. And that would be only about $300 million dollars, right? Instead we spent several hundred BILLION on useless bailouts.
There is a revolution coming, Charblaize. It might be peaceful and it might not but we WILL take back our country!
@scottcoleson (578)
• Pilot Mountain, North Carolina
24 Dec 09
How would this concept make any sense at all? Sure, we would all love to get a million dollars from the government and I'm sure the American people would be a lot more appreciative of the money than a lot of the companies the government gave money to, but it really is not even close to being possible to do this. This would not cost $300 million dollars to give everyone $1 million dollars, it would be well over $300 TRILLION dollars...the population of the US is over 300 million. If the government was to do this, the country would go bankrupt before they ever saw any of that money paid back into them and the value of the dollar would plunge lower than it already is so our whole monetary system would be useless. It is already borderline useless, but this is nothing compared to what it could be.
1 person likes this
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
24 Dec 09
I was never much good at math! Still, the money the gov't has spent hasn't done the average person any good, unemployment keeps going up and the only ones not really suffering are the banks that were saved. All that money spent, billions and billions, and there are so many people who've lost their jobs with no prospect of another.
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
27 Dec 09
Just for family households would probably be just as much as they spent on the banks, companies that went to paradise and bankrupt anyhow. If Obama put that money back into the people maybe find a cut off point and not to everyone (like not to the "rich" or millionaires, billionaires, etc.) just to poverty, low income, middle-class to help them get back on their feet, house, cars, education, out of debt. Some may blow the money and not have anything left afterwards, others may invest and many would still work. Money doesn't go far these days.
I didn't think this discussion would go all overboard, just stating that instead of bailing out companies the money should have gone to the people to stimulate the economy, get houses paid off instead of forclosed, get vehicles purchased instead of closings, lay offs, get education paid for instead of many trying to get back in and can't receive grants or scholarships anymore because no companies are allowing that or offering anymore.
Its not like this will ever happen but just a thought, idea, discussion.
@scottcoleson (578)
• Pilot Mountain, North Carolina
21 Dec 09
I would love to be on the receiving end of $1 million as I'm sure everyone else would, but do you really understand what you're saying? In one breath you are criticizing the President for his handling of the economic situation and saying that he should give everyone a million dollars. That would cost the country well over $300 trillion!!!! I'm sure that there would be a great deal of spending on the part of the American people, but it would end us up in the same situation we are in today. The government has tried giving stimulus money and it hasn't had the desired effect so far. As far as the salary of the President...do you realize that there are college basketball and football coaches who make more than double or triple the salary of the US President? And let's not even get started on the salaries of big business leaders. A million dollars for everyone sounds great on the surface, but we'll be bankrupt before the first cent gets paid back into the system. So, in reality, that would be useless.
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
27 Dec 09
I don't think the athletes shouldn't be paid so much, sometimes I wonder if the coaches get paid as much or less. I told my brother to go into sports after he graduates!!! :)
Like I have said in other posts, just a discussion
@fsll518 (304)
• China
22 Dec 09
Gee... there would be problem if every citizen gets 1 million USD. The over giving of currency to the society would bring inflation problem.
For example, it would cost about 5000 bucks to buy a humburger, or about 1000000 bucks to buy a computer, etc. Then people's money would have less value than now. I guess the president also consider the best for the people, and he has lots of economist giving suggestions to improve the situation.
I don't have any partisanship issue here. So, I guess my opinion should be objective.
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
27 Dec 09
yea, but I am sure his economists are more concerned with their pockets. products pricing keep rising to where we can't afford it anyhow.
@coolcoder (2018)
• United States
21 Dec 09
Going along with this train of thought, where, exactly would Obama get all the money to pay out to every single American? My guess is taxpayer money. If people started having their hard-earned money stripped away from them and distributed all over the place, they won't be able to afford to buy anything. Businesses would stop hiring people, and some of them would probably go out of business, leaving millions of workers without jobs. Tell me how that's good for the economy.
@hoodwinks (157)
• United States
21 Dec 09
as far as for him to be impeached, I don't know. as for giving us the one million. yes I agree. for a family with kids should get at least one mil. and for those who are single with no family should receive half a mil. instead they gave billions of dollars to banks who just paid their CEO's to stay with them. which I think is BS, you are right about stimulating the economy. I know that I would have bought my family a nice house to live in, an extra vehicle so while the wife is working me and the kids can go do things. also could have put money away for their college expenses. sad how this country is worried about banks that do not help the people whats so ever. most of them banks won't give loans to people who need them, and not only that I could just imagine how much interest and Apr's are involved. sad times we are dealing with. America is one of the strongest and we are struggling more then most country's there are people who live here and don't have clean water going their way. there's a lot we don't realize. on Opera once I seen go to a state can't remember which one but some people didn't have fresh water or electricity. but instead we over seas trying to help people who can barely handle themselves. while supplies are going up for us.
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
27 Dec 09
You were thinking on my lines. All the money he gave he gave to corporations that went on paradise island and didn't do what they were supposed to could have helped our families, get homes, vehicles, help with our education, bills, etc. Yes, I would have invested most of it but still would have bought me a house instead of keep renting, got a vehicle that runs, paid off my debts and finished my college and still would work. I feel America isn't going to be strong much longer for its hard times, people laid off, unemployed, companies moving out of country and closing. yes, we need to help ourselves especially today, we are going to be like other area's very soon.
@jstadlman (19)
• United States
21 Dec 09
You cant impeach him as he has done no criminal act and he is to smart to put his administration in that position. However you have the right idea you're just taking it to personal and you need stipulations on this idea. The idea will work, for $1 mill per person in the household\family with a maximum of $3 - $4 million per family paid out over x # of years (3-5) years. First in order to claim, anyone at a certain age such as 55 must retire. That will free up millions of jobs for youngerage people to move up, open new jobs, and so and so forth. Second a percantage of the $ must go back into the economy specifically targeting the home and American automobile sector...both that are in dire need of the right kind of assistance. Third a percantage is required to invest back into other aspects of the economy, stocks, bonds, college\learning investments for children of the household. Right now the IRS ensures proper taxes are collected\paid per household. For the given year and subsequent years of the "payout" the tax forms are modified to prove the above stipulations. That would fix the problems and put the $ in the hands of the American people instead of the buerocratic companies that ran them into the ground, while as the same time ensuring the $ is being invested back in the country again
@charblaize (1026)
• United States
22 Dec 09
guess didn't state correctly, 1 million per household. Children don't have a say and this is more towards the "working" americans. Ones who work pay check to pay check and low income, heck the ones who are making it can suffice now why give them more.
@linda65355 (1)
• United States
11 Aug 10
have a us lottery tax free .. make it mandatory to contribute just one dollar out of your pay check .. as long as you have a ss # and have worked within a certain time period .. you are eligible to win the lottery .. so if we collect 100 million every week .. every week 2 people from each state get picked out of the lottery and win 1 million dollars each , tax free.. every week someone will win and your almost guaranteed to eventually be a winner .. we have been talking about this for the longest time , but dont know who or what we could do to get this plan in action.. or make it 4 people win 500,000 whatever