i just wrote my own entry about the "reject the rebate" project...the idea is to refuse to be bought off by that tempting rebate check--to tell bush to shove it, and then redirect that money to an organization that counters the bush agenda.

i'm 99% certain i'm going to do it for a lot of different reasons...to reject bush's shortsightedness and twisted values, to substantively help an organization i believe in, and finally, cuz it just feels right, personally, intellectually, politically.

anybody else?

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

Answers

I heard a counter argument to that idea -- that it only supports the conservative position that if you give taxes back to the people, they'll support private charities and the government can get out of the helping business. I don't think that's a good reason not to make charitable donations, though.

Me, I'm giving my rebate to Jeremy, because I took the entire mortgage deduction this year. If he wants to give it to the Sierra Club, that's okay with me.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

I heard on the news this a.m. that most Americans were planning on either putting their rebates in their savings' accounts or using it to pay off debt, which are also both counter to the Bush rebate agenda. So, I guess that would be a more self-serving way to protest the rebate.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

I hereby announce my intention to open up a p.O. Box in the name of liberals everywhere. Feel free to send a money order in the amount of your rebate. Make a proud bold liberal American statement. Let me help you to send a message to Washington.

---

Why stop with just rejecting the rebate check? Why not send Dubya a little more money? Don't like that idea? What's the matter? If you send an extra thousand, we could all have perscription drugs and free health care. Come on! Don't be stingy. Send Washington more money. Be a patriot!

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

Keep in mind, when you decide how to spend this money, that it isn't really a rebate... it's an advance on next year's refund.

see here: http://www.irs.gov/ind_info/apinfo/index.html

and here: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php? sid=2522&mode=&order=0

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

shit. thank you josh. major re-evaluation. i think this link for the smirkingchimp article is better. what a major, major con job. god i'm annoyed all over again.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

Erp. trying again. i think this link is better....

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

Maybe a re-evaluation of the reasoning, but hopefully not for your actions. If I recall correctly, the $300 is supposed to cover the retroactive tax cut from the time the bill was signed into law back to the first of this year- reflecting the difference in the lowest bracket (which went from 15% to 10%).

So while no, this isn't a rebate of 2000's taxes, it is money that you would not have seen *but for* this tax cut.

And frankly, there are a lot of folks and organizations out there who would benefit much more substantively than I (and a good plurality, if not a majority of this board) from $300 falling out of the sky.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

I'm feeling guilty that I qualify and people that can really use the money, of course won't be getting a check in the mail.

As to what I'm going to do with my Bush prize? Part of me wants to rebel and give the cash away to the democratic party and the other part wants to take the money and run.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

The people who need the money don't pay any taxes, so how can they get this money. This isn't welfare,

ITS A TAX CUT

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

I think that it's great that anyone should decide to use the 'rebate' to donate to any cause they believe in - but that is a usage of it, not a rejection of it. (To reject it, you'd have to return it to the IRS.)

In our case, we will be using it to help finance my next semester of college, which I'd otherwise probably have to put off another semester. I'm neither proud nor apologetic about that - it helps me further a goal I've been shooting for since long before I ever heard of GW, and will likely still be working toward after he's a bad memory.

I do have faith (and crossing my fingers that it's not misguided) that the majority of the American people are not stupid enough to be bought for $300 a head, or fail to see that handing off a short term pittance while taking from us longterm is a big ripoff. (Besides, I think he overestimates the average person's long term memory - this should have been timed much closer to the next election.) Unfortunately, though, this will make it nearly impossible for most of us to get a solid fix on just how little our taxes were really cut when we do our returns next year... I suppose some who actually bought into that campaign line might be fooled..

Anyway.. in our situation, my education is the best non-profit I can think of.

-- Anonymous, July 24, 2001

Here's my take. I can't stop the "rebate" from coming, I couldn't influence the process that made it happen, and since we usually get a refund it's probably just going to mean a smaller refund next year. So the liberal guilt will have to wait for another time 'cause Slickery needs a digital camera.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

I heard someone on tv say "it's not a rebate. it's money that you have been overtaxed, so you deserve to get it back." wish I could find the quote, it was said much better then I relayed it.

as for me, all extra money goes toward debt. two years ago my husband and I racked up bills taking a trip to india, paying for part of our wedding, and going on our honeymoon. for us it will be $600 I guess, and it's going straight to the credit cards.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

If you're worried about being that Republican poster child who will give to charity if given control of his [sic] money, give it to something that directly opposes Bush's plan, like Planned Parenthood. Or someone planning to chain themselves to the Arctic Wildlife Preserve. (Try to find someone big.)

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

The rebate started out as a Democratic proposal.

Joshua Micah Marshall tells the story here: Bush put up a rich-get-richer tax relief plan, the Democrats offered the rebate as an alternative that would (a) be more progressive and (b) stimulate the economy more, the Bush Administration ridiculed the idea, it got included into the tax bill, and now Bush is taking credit for it.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

The tax rebate is paying for my feminist porn writing class. (Okay, I paid for the class already, but I wouldn't have been able to take it if I hadn't had the upcoming windfall.)

I didn't mean it as an anti-Bush gesture, but it's furthering the cause of smut and that's good enough for me.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

I'm going to use my rebate to "troll" around at Chuy's Mexican restaurant in Austin, Texas, and offer margarita's to underaged, college girls, whose daddy's own (or used to own) baseball teams and oil wells.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

Those are damn fine margaritas at Chuy's. I have to say, those drinks are so good that I can almost understand someone underage trying to get one even if she is surrounded by Secret Service agents.

Let me know when you're going to be trolling, Morpheus, I'll get a group of friends and we'll dress up as underage girls with attitude so we can scam free drinks. Wish I still had my fake ID from high school.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

" heard on the news this a.m. that most Americans were planning on either putting their rebates in their savings' accounts or using it to pay off debt, which are also both counter to the Bush rebate agenda. "

Jennifer, I've reviewed the whole Bush agenda, and I can't find anything that says you shouldn't save or pay your bills. If Bush didn't want you to save, why did he raise the limits on 401k's, IRAs, etc?

The actual Bush agenda is just that you should keep a little more of your money, since the goverment doesn't really need it.

Anything you spend it on is probably going to be better for the country than if it had stayed in D.C., but that's really beside the point.

Even if you spend on stock in Salon.com, it's your money, and you should do what you like with it.

Jim

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

Not quite, Jim. Part of the point of this rebate was supposedly to stimulate the economy by increasing spending. Putting the money in savings or using it pay off debt won't do much for the economy.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

Exactly. Bush has iterated many times that he expects this tax rebate to give the economy a shot in the arm.

-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

Just to be contrarian ... do you really think of taxes as your own money? It is money you earned, that the government has taken -- legally, but still, taken from your wages. The rebate check isn't some gift from the government, it's just a small refund of a portion of the amount you paid in last year. For most of us, it's quite a small portion, probably less than 10 percent, maybe even less than 5 percent.

Me, I am no tax protestor, I understand the need for taxes and while I advocate any measures to make the tax system more fair, I don't mind paying my share. But since most of us pay the bulk of our taxes, if not all, via payroll deduction and therefore never see it, do we really think of it as ours?

I'd also be curious, for those of you who don't want this rebate, do you take advantage of any deductions you're entitled to? If you feel strongly that the government needs more money, and you could deduct a large amount, do you forgo the deduction and take the standard deduction even if it's less, so that you're paying more in? And if not, then why do you oppose one measure to get some of your money back to you, but take advantage of other measures to do the same thing?

Me, I'm probably going to put the rebate toward whatever current bills I have due when it comes in.



-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

I heard a counter argument to that idea -- that it only supports the conservative position that if you give taxes back to the people, they'll support private charities and the government can get out of the helping business.

If that notion were proved to be true, what would be wrong with it?



-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

cory ... yes, but if the public only provided a turkey for Thanksgiving, I don't think that would be a success. Mind you, I don't think it would work. I don't think the public is generous, compassionate or disciplined enough on the whole to provide consistent, dependable public service.

But if I turned out to be wrong in that, the government could indeed get out of the giving business. It's an untestable proposition, but I can't think of a time in history when it's ever really worked.



-- Anonymous, July 25, 2001

I don't mind paying taxes. I think the government should play a big role in providing services that everyone needs and to do that, they need to levy taxes. This "rebate" scheme is lame and I disagree with the politics all of the tax cut proposals, but I have no qualms about spending the money. No more than I have about spending the tax money they don't ask for that I would willingly pay to fund a national health care scheme, for example.

If you reject the rebate, will you continue to reject the tax cuts in your future paychecks as well?

As to charity, I'd rather see them funded privately than by through federal or state taxes. Using your rebate to fund a charity or NP of your choice seems like a perfectly fine and legitimate use of the money. If I hadn't spent mine in advance I'd give it to Planned Parenthood (in addition to what I already give.)

Instead, Parsifal and I quite unselfishly did our bit to keep the economy from tanking - my new piece of majolica will help float all boats that way instead. Hah.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2001

My husband says he's going to give it to the Democrats, but I think he's actually kidding.

I thought about using my half against credit debt, but I think we're going to use it for some yard stuff we need to do. We might have charged that expense so it all works out.

I don't feel guilty about taking it. I'd rather they spend the money on reducing the national debt of charity things, but since they aren't, what the heck.

-- Anonymous, July 26, 2001

A couple of comments on the tax cut:

1) Bush has been for tax cuts for year, in good times and bad. It's a moral question. The goverment just doesn't have the right to keep your money just because it can. In 1975 President Ford sponsered a one time "rebate". That's what the Democrats wanted this year, and accounts for the gimmecky nature of the current refund advance. President Ford had a lot of specific suggestions as to how to spend you rebate. It was a bad idea and did nothing. You've never heard Bush suggest anything other than that it's your money, and you should do with it as you will. Sure, putting this extra money into to circulation we hope will boost the economy, but that's not the reason for it.

"Not quite, Jim. Part of the point of this rebate was supposedly to stimulate the economy by increasing spending. Putting the money in savings or using it pay off debt won't do much for the economy. "

Putting the money into savings is about the best thing you could do with the money to help the economy. Investors have been scared to the sidelines by the poor return in stocks and bonds over the last 15 months. More money for investments can only help. Paying off debt is helpful also, since it frees up that money for others to borrow. As long as you just bury it in the back yard it can only help. Tax cuts are mostly self-funding because the goverment gets more tax income from the resulting increase in economic acitivity than it loses from reduced tax rates.

Jim

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2001

"As long as you just bury it" NO NO NO, Beth, please DON'T bury your rebate. Sorry for the misspellings and poor grammer above.

I'll take my tax discussion back to 3WA, because I'm just need more than once chance to get a posting correct on these complicated subjects.

-- Anonymous, July 27, 2001

considering i owed something in the vicinity of $1400 on my taxes this year, and something in the vicinity of $800 the year before (how come i keep OWING the government money??), i'm less than thrilled to think my nifty bush-sponsored *cough* rebate potentially means i'll owe $300 MORE in taxes next year.... seems silly to give it to me just to take it back in a year.

sounds like everyone's got a good reason for doing whatever they're doing with their rebate. and even if you're doing it to spite bush and his agenda, someone else has a reason why it isn't counter to his agenda at all. what's a good liberal to do?? (besides whine. :> )

me, i want to spend it on a digital camera. or a new bumper for my car (someone made a melon-sized dent in it :P ). or rent, which is going up. or my visa bill. and i really did want to give it away to planned parenthood or amfar or someone.

in fact i should immediately slap it into savings and leave it there, so next year when i get soaked by the government (again!) i can actually pay it without too much whining.

-- Anonymous, July 28, 2001

Cindy, if you owe the government s much every year that you owe a penalty at tax time, then you need to increase your withholding. Otherwise, look at it this way: at least you're earning interest on the money instead of the government.

I have never understood why people think it's good to get money back on your tax return, and bad to owe money, without any consideration as to the total tax amount. It's absolutely insane to get a giant tax return, because it means you let someone else earn interest on your money all year.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Good point, Beth.

~

What's more, this "it's *your* money" argument is about as useful as the "Hey, *I* pay your salary to the clerk behind the counter at the DMV office." And?

Of course it's your money. It's your money from the first dollar in taxes until the last dollar. If GW, Armey, et al really did think the "it's your money" argument held water, they'd work to shut down the government from top to bottom.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

I wish all the people who say, "It's *my* money" (it is) would recognize that when the bagboy at the local Safeway bags thousands of dollars of groceries a week, that's *his* money. He has to give all that money over to the boss, who gives him back just enough to get him in another day.

Someone taking the product of your labor is someone taking the product of your labor, whether it's called "taxes" or "profit".

If we can put a man on the moon we can find a better way to live than that.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Huh?

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Curtis - what I mean is that we all produce wealth in one form or another - by creating things or providing services mostly. We then turn that wealth over to a boss, who gives us a small paycheck in exchange for the large amount of wealth we just created.

Then out of that small paycheck, the government takes a portion for itself.

Some people complain about the government taking a small portion of our paycheck, but not a boss taking a much larger portion of the actual wealth we're producing.

The "It's *my* money" argument should apply to anyone who takes away the fruits of your labor, whether it's the government or a boss or a bank or a group of investors.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Hmm. What about the wealth the grocery bagger (a position near and dear to my heart, btw) takes from the store owner? I mean, he's taking advantage of the physical plant, advertising, foodstuffs, etc.. Shouldn't the grocery store be compensated for that?

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Well, obviously several people are involved in the creation of that wealth - the stockers, the cashier, etc. etc. I was merely trying to illustrate a point. Obviously all of them should share in the wealth they are creating. But whereas the average bagger makes little over minimum wage on their shitty UFCW contract - the CEO of Safeway Steven A. Burd raked in $104,751,268 in total compensation (pay and stock and such) from Safeway in 2000. (You can look up the compensation many CEOs get at http://www.paywatch.org).

My point is more general though. I disagree with this idea that when "government" does something it's bad, when "private enterprise" does the same thing, it's ok.

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

Well, look at it this way. The "rebate" you get now is actually paying you back for the taxes you paid in the 80s to bail Neil Bush out of the Savings and Loan debacle. :)

-- Anonymous, July 29, 2001

For those of you that want to return your refund to the government, this form may help you out. After all, it is your money, so do what you like with it:

Refund Return Form

-- Anonymous, August 01, 2001

Actually, now that I think about it I'm surprised theres nothing about the rebate on the War Tax Resistance page.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 2001