i have not got mine, by the way, but it is always the
moral thing to take less from the people who earn it.
i do not see it as giving it back as much as i see it
as not taking it. sense this latest check is not in
the mail, i do not think i can judge its affect on
this ecconomy.

--- "Cleveland, Kyle E." <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Well, Kat, the "official" line on the avg. $400 per
> family check/cheque was
> that we (the average American compulsive
> over-spender) would toss that check
> back into the economic river as fast as we could get
> it out of our mailboxes
> and into the bank.  That was supposed to
> "kick-start" the economy and put
> Mr. Bush into a favorable light as the president who
> gave back some of the
> tax dollars we all complain about having to pay.
> Isn't that a pretty fair
> assessment of the administration's logic?  Trouble
> is, I don't know of a
> soul who thought this was a good idea.  I know no
> one who thought the check
> they're supposed to get this summer (Btw, haven't
> got mine yet. Have you?)
> was worth the kick in the knees it gave to an
> already unsteady economic
> recovery.  Now, the recovery has stopped and we're
> back to deficit spending
> again (to be fair, though, our economic slowdown
> started before the
> election--it just didn't become apparent until GWB
> was already in office).
>
> The thing that irks me is the robust tax breaks he's
> giving to the
> super-wealthy, while the middle class carries the
> burden of the sour
> economy.  If you think that's a Republican/Democrat
> issue, think again.  The
> old-money Republicans and elitist new-money
> Democrats will ALWAYS take care
> of their own first.  The rich got richer and the
> poor got poorer just as
> fast during Clinton's eight years as they did during
> the Reagan/Bush years.
> Both get free rides on the backs of the working
> middle class.
>
> As far as the entitlement and social welfare
> programs go, Kat, I don't
> really see efficiency or sense in most of them
> regardless if they are
> administered at the national, state or local level.
> Head Start was a rose
> in a garden of weeds.
>
> Kyle
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kat [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 7:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: History redux; was RE: Quiz About 9/11
>
>
> We are operating at a deficit that is the biggest in
> many years. I'm not
> happy with that at all.
>
> And we have tax cuts?  How, pray tell, are we going
> to pay for all those
> services?  I'm mainly afraid that essential social
> welfare programs are
> going to get cut even more and so are educational
> programs.  Our
> children are suffering.
>
> Kat


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com