Ha, ha, that is funny and oh so true! This has been a hot topic in the Journal newsroom today as well. Nearly everybody here has said they are going to use the money to pay bills. I think that so many people are so bad off right now that they are in a position where that's what they have to use it for. Many people are going to use some of it just to buy necessities such as groceries. That should tell anybody how bad off our economy is right now.

I read an Associated Press story today  that said more and more people are selling off personal belongings, including antiques, just to make ends meet.

Could it get any worse?

Thats a pessimistic view of it...

No one is perfect, and I'm in no way claiming Bush is perfect, but to spew demagogue without giving appropriate credit just isn't right. You seem very disgusted because the government gave you back $600. While I agree with the economists that this rebate won't do much to stimulate the economy, the economists also agree that there will also be no negative impact either.

Credit should be given to bush for at least trying something. His is an attempt that will be successfully carried through. What successful attempts have your representative or senator done? What has your representative or senator done to help lower your food costs? How about fuel costs? What about electricity and natural gas costs?

Back to your comment about Bush's lack of attempt: what about his tax cuts? Moreover, what about Congress who seems to want these tax cuts to expire? Bush's tax cuts generated more revenue for the federal government, and also created millions of jobs and lowered unemployment to great lows. But suddenly the path gets a bit rough and we are to neglect the progress we've made so far? to neglect the honest attempts to make our lives and economy better? No way, this is baleful.

What about Bush's numerous free trade agreements that he helped set up? Not only has this been a contributing factor to the economic growth at home, but abroad as well.

Congress is a collection of "representatives", because supposedly they are doing the will of the people. Isn't that their job? What about Congress' outlandish spending habits? Do you propose this is Bush's fault too? Is Bush not in the right to blame them?

If you agree and say that it's not all Bush's fault, then what changes are you proposing to make to Congress and the Senate, those who claim to represent *you*? Or are we to stand idly on the side in hopes others will make good decisions for us?

In response to my brash comment, I'd like to follow up with the most recent Non-Farm Payroll numbers that just came in. Lower than expected decline in corporate payrolls, huge jump in the household survey - the best in 5 months, actually - and a drop in unemployment, dropping to 4.95 %.

Also, a follow up with the recent GDP numbers: a 0.6% growth. Not stellar, by any means, but it is "growth" when everyone is crying the GDP-decline wolf (aka recession).

A month ago Bush at one of his press conferences refused to say the economy was in or heading to a recession - “We’re not in a recession, we’re in a slowdown.” Sounds like he was right, all along.

The point Adam made is key:  If you don't think the president is doing enough, what do you propose he should do?  As an engineering student, we live off of finding solutions, not pointing out the problem (and maybe even laughing at it).

Otherwise, what do we gain?

P.S.

Even the prostitution realm is being outsourced to other countries, so I guess we are stuck with beer.

After all this debate, I sure could go for a Corona.