On a more serious note, I do think government can play a positive role in easing and moderating the shocks of the global economy on average American’s lives. If a worker loses his or her job to free trade, we shouldn’t become protectionists, but we should help retrain that worker and provide unemployment benifits. In a simmilar manner, I can understand a temporary gas tax holiday, perhaps paid for by a small windfall profits tax on oil companies (see Mike Kinsley’s Slate column for a defense of this idea). But unpaid for $100 rebates that have nothing to do with gas consumption is bad policy and insulting to the American people’s intelegence.

NCN: Energy is a matter of national security. I agree that an important role of the government is to protect this country, but it’s unbelievably shortsighted to limit that view to military action. In fact, the development of alternative energy sources would greatly reduce the number of military conflicts that we join (or start ourselves). Do you honestly think it’s a good idea for us to be more or less completely dependent on Middle Eastern energy sources? Do you really think it’s a good idea to funnel tremendous amounts of wealth into countries that are bent on our destruction?

They can use my $100 to pay down the debt load. They need it more than I do.

Frugalforlife
Queercents

They can use my $100 to pay down the debt load. They need it more than I do.

BTW: There is no such thing as “blowing” money. When you spend money, you redistribute wealth via the marketplace. There are wise and unwise personal spending choices, but every dollar you spend, whether it is on pancake batter, a baseball glove, a diamond ring, a yacht, or a ping pong paddle, creates wealth. I’d rather see weath distributed via a free-flowing marketplace than via taxing and spending through the govt coffers. If we slashed taxes 50 percent, across the board, at local, state, and national levels, and did away with the various surcharges for goods and services, we’d create so much economic activity that you wouldn’t NEED food stamps, welfare, etc. (Except for those who are truly disabled and unable to fend for themselves. Please note: I believe in socail programs, but only well-managed and sensible ones. Some jackass who sits at home everyday watching Ellen and eating popcorn doesn’t deserve a dime of my hard earned cash.)

As for proportional distribution of the rebate: RICH people should get more, not less. Jeez..they’re the ones paying the salaries, creating the jobs, investing in the future, etc. etc. It is high time we stop demanding that rich people “pay their fair share”. Rich people pay WAY more than their fair share. Discrimination is ugly, no matter who it affects. To say that someone who is rich doesn’t “need” the rebate is to miss the point. Rich people spend their money. And when they spend, EVERYBODY benefits. Who do you think makes money when Tiger Woods buys a car? The factory worker. How about when the Donald buys a piece of property? The construction worker, hotel staff, maid, etc. Rich people make our economy work! Are you telling me that a guy who runs a trucking company, employing say 100 workers deserves the SAME rebate as the woman who works in an office building, 9 to 5, or the man who sells insurance? NO way! That “rich” business man deserves WAY more of a rebate! Why? He’s contributing more to the “pot”.

People need to stop being jealous and start thinking of ways that they can have a bigger piece of the pie. Nobody ever made a dime complaining about how the rich got rich, and how the poor got poor. Nope. To make a dime, you have to come up with a BETTER way to do what the rich man is doing, and then do it.

What I mean is, Companies simply pass their taxes on to consumers in the form of higher prices. So when you say they want to repeal tax incentives from oil companies what do you think will happen? The price will go up of course. The reason that the incentives were put in place was to allow the companies to sell their products and a lower cost, since removing the tax costs of production lowers the production cost.

If you want cheaper gas, guess what, removing tax incentives is only going to make prices go up. If you really want to fix things you should support the fair tax. Then we can end this entire tangled tax system, tax incentives, and crooked politics. We will finally be able to see what our government is charging us.

NO COMPANY PAYS TAXES, THEY PASS THE BUCK TO YOU!
If the cost of oil goes up, the price of gas goes up. If the price of taxes go up, the price of gas goes up.

I don’t see it helping people in lower income brackets. Many people, regardless of income bracket will likely consider it found money and blow it on DVDs or something. It really won’t provide much relief on the gas front, for anyone. Sure, your net spending may be down this month, but next month gas will be up 10 cents/gallon and where’s your rebate check then?

My own gas usage is around $160/month. My wife’s is double that, at least, as she drives a lot for her job (fortunately, she’s reimbursed by the company). $200 in our pocket this month for a gas rebate wouldn’t mean much to us, as it’d be gone next month.