Comments:George Bush proposes economic growth package worth up to US$150 billion

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

I really think this story has not recieved enough coverage on other news sites. --User:Anonymous101 Talk 12:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I am so freekin' poor. But I'm still trillions of dollars richer than the U.S. government. How hilarious is that? — 22:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, because Keynesianomics works. And because everyone knows that a temporary economic program is one of the most permanent devices of humanity created. Because consumption is /always/ better than savings! Ugh, this royally pisses me off. Fephisto 15:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Save without a goal!!!Edit

Bury it in a hole!!!; and borrow a whole lot more ( 21:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC))
whats in your savings?

package dealEdit

Who will get the money, business wage earners. Who else? Is veterans included in this package and senior's or just wage earners and business's get a tax break. I am confused on who will receive these checks. sandy hagan —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Sandy, you're simply not cynical enough. The key proposed instrument is tax breaks, and if the record of the current administration is anything to go by, the lion's share of these funds will go to businesses with the noble goal of "promoting investment and job creation". The investment will be in the renumeration packages of the senior executives, and the job creation will be in China. The average working-class American will notice no difference; a higher percentage of his income will still go to the taxman than that of his company's management who earn enough to hire accountants; he will still be plagued with cost of living expenses being a very significant percentage of his costs. Face it, they call it the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe in it. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)