Over-stimulated

June 13, 2008 by barbara

barbara writes

Yesterday, David received a first-class letter from the IRS. On the front of the envelope was a boxed notice that said, among other things: Do not throw away! Thank God for that! Because, you know, we erudite progressives are so accustomed to living on the edge, we habitually toss communications from the IRS into the trash.

Understanding Your Economic Stimulus Payment, the letter begins. Then, fading to black, it continues: Please keep a copy of this notice for your records. It informs David that he will definitely receive his stimulus payment within four days (P.S., if he does not receive it within six weeks, he should be in touch). See update at end of post for a fab way to make Republicans go ballistic!

Then, under the subhead What You Need To Do (they capitalized the T, and therefore, being an obedient citizen, I do likewise), the paragraph begins: You do not need to do anything.

Booyah! The United States government has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to send out millions of first-class letters to let taxpayers know we will receive our economic stimulus check in four days (actually, in David's case, the check came two days before the letter, but I digress), and we don’t have to do anything. Nothing. Nada.

David weighed his economy stimulating options. Turns out it was an easy choice for him. One of the meds that does a fabulous job mitigating against chemo nausea is not covered by his insurance. It’s very expensive. In fact, his stimulus check will cover just one dose of the medication. And so it is that David’s economic stimulus check will go directly to Big Pharma.

I cannot tell you the joy it brings us to be able to stimulate the moribund economy in this way. No, really. Being the frugal man he is, it’s entirely possible that David would have parked his economic stimulus check in savings. This way, he is doing his part by spending it immediately.

So thank you, George and Dick and all the other geniuses who dreamed up this amazing cash give-away. Give me liberty or give me debt! Oh. That reminds me of an email making the rounds this week. It goes like this:

Economic Stimulus Package 2008

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?
A. Shut up.

(Thanks, Marion.)

UPDATE: Just had a beautiful brain bubble. How 'bout we contribute all (or at least part) of our economic stimuli to Democratic candidates' campaigns?

In my part of the world, that would mean parceling our windfalls among Barack Obama, Al Franken (U.S. Senate), Steve Sarvi (CD2 U.S. House candidate), and Mike Obermueller (SD38B MN House candidate).

This'll make the Pugs crazy while doing something immensely worthwhile. Whaddaya think?

Posted in

Comments

MLS (not verified) | June 13, 2008 - 9:54am

Yes Barb, our Government at work keeping us taxpayers happy and content. You know, like riding on a merry-go-round.
At our home we are still waiting to be over stimulated. We
realize that might take a while since we are not at the same address we were when we filed our 2007 taxes and since
US Government sent mail will not be forwarded... Oh well,
who knows maybe we will receive the check just in time to pay our 2nd quarter federal tax. I guess China will just have to wait another year at this house.

»

susan | June 13, 2008 - 11:27am

Love this!! I totally vote for stimulating the spending of Democratic candidates. I'll be sending mine -- if I get one, so far not even a letter -- to the Obama campaign. Then they can buy the stuff they need from China.

»

paul miller (not verified) | June 15, 2008 - 8:59am

-close circuit to Strib readers-

Mr. Justin:

Your third string report on the Media Reform conference was lame. Do you really think the NY Times broke the story that the war coverage was slanted by using military spoke persons?? All the NY Times did was chronicle, years after the fact, what a thinking person has known from the minute the Bush Administration rolled out it's Iraq war agenda with the main stream media in tow.

Your comment about people being angry about "anyone who wears a suit to work" is inane. The debate about the media compliancy in a war that may include a million dead Iraqis includes righteous anger, no small story there. Note to you and the mainstream media: elections were stolen and Bush and Cheney have committed numerous impeachable offenses. Your paper can "break" those stories anytime now.

Sorry, you have nothing to offer in the debate about the role journalism should play in covering the news of our times. You sold out long ago. Whether you wear a suit to work or not truly makes no difference to me or anyone that has been paying attention to the state of our media and the dismal state of the Star Tribune. We're not angry about people wearing suits we're angry about a war marketed by the advertisement sections that arrive on our doorsteps each morning.

Paul W. Miller
Northfield, Minnesota

»

barbara says (not verified) | June 15, 2008 - 11:07am

You know, it was a real dilemma, having the media conference here the same weekend as the state DFL convention. More than once, I considered bailing on the convention because the media thing is where my heart really lies. However, being the good little girl my mama raised me to be, it seemed disloyal to the people who elected me a Franken delegate to kiss 'em off.

I have seen almost nothing about the conference beyond the kerfuffle with Moyers and the Fox maggot. When things settle down here a bit, I need to ferret out the conference web site and find out for myself what was said there. Ain't no way I'm gonna get that from the Strib, apparently.

»