What's In The Stimulus For Workers

CBS Evening News: Breaking Down Where The Tax Breaks Fall And What Happened To Small Business Aid

(CBS)  For restaurant owner Tom Glascow, and for most Americans, the new stimulus package serves up a variety of tax cuts, CBS News congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes reports.

"The bottom line is every little bit will help," Glascow said.

The biggest bit is a $400 credit for almost all workers. That works out to about $13 a week, which may not sound like much, but consider this: "Basically what does my business good is people with disposable income that can spend a little extra on lunch on a daily basis," Glasgow said.

Americans will also get more tax breaks for making big purchases - up to $8,000 for first-time homebuyers. New-car buyers can deduct the sales tax and the college tax credit will jump from $1,800 a year to $2,500.

But the biggest winners may be low-income workers, like Glascow's eight employees. The bill will give workers making as little as $3,000 a year a check of $1,000 per child, and gives a one-time payout of $250 to social security beneficiaries.

"The poor spend almost all additional money that they have coming in," Williams said. "They have lots and lots of needs, relative to their incomes. They need every dollar they can have and a new dollar in the door goes out pretty quickly."

But the stimulus bill does little to spur small business owners like Glascow to add to their payroll.

"President Obama during the campaign proposed a $3,000 refundable tax credit for any business that hired an additional worker," Williams said.

When he was on the campaign trail, Mr. Obama told small-business owners: "You are going to get a tax break!"

"But that's been dropped, it's not part of the stimulus package," Williams said.

And in today's environment, it's going to take a lot to convince employers to start hiring again.

[boxcarbetty1]

In the state of Louisiana our Govenor decided that we the poor people do not need extended unemployement. Oh I forgot only the rich or poor welfare people are helped forget about the middle class that is now the poorest of the people. That decision should not be left for one person to decide. Bobbie Jindal made that decision well he does not speak for me.

[boxcarbetty1]

Our government gave billions of dollars to rescue the rich, he gave us 13 dollars a week, what a slap in the face.

[rhs648]

I would like to know why people who are currently on unemployment benefits have to pay Federal Income Tax on unemployment benefits. Does not seem fair to them. When Treasury Secretary Paulson revised the tax code for Wells Fargo to purchase Wachovia, and last night the news said the current stimulus package has a 10 million tax break for GMAC. So why does the bill give a break to the Americans on unemployment an not collect Federal income tax on 2008 unemployment benefits?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by varovefr

Virtually all income is taxable including gambling winnings, tips, wages, salaries, and commissions. There may be some exceptions such as disability income in some instances. The taxation of income from unemployment is part of the tax codes. One could argue that unemployment income should be taxed like any other income.

[varovefr]

I would like to know why people who are currently on unemployment benefits have to pay Federal Income Tax on unemployment benefits. Does not seem fair to them. When Treasury Secretary Paulson revised the tax code for Wells Fargo to purchase Wachovia, and last night the news said the current stimulus package has a 10 million tax break for GMAC. So why does the bill give a break to the Americans on unemployment an not collect Federal income tax on 2008 unemployment benefits?

[rhs648]

Maybe Madoff was doing the "books" that year...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by rudedogrulz

rudedogrulz - I''m beginning to think that we had the same economics professors in college.

[rhs648]

70,000? Really that''''s not as huge deficit unless it''''s a non-profit organization


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by rudedogrulz

Hi rudedogrulz. You are correct. It is a small non-profit organization and $70,000 isn''t a huge amount of money. However, this organization has @ 300 hundred members who have pumped their heart and sole into the organization for almost 100 years. Certainy it is peanuts when compared to General Motors or our economy.

[rhs648]

If the surpluses were real, why didn''t we fix social security, medicare, and medicaid? Were the surpluses real or were the surpluses the result of statistical manipulation? If there were surpluses, the social security trust fund could have been replenished for guture generations. Are we dealing with funny money, numbers that look good on paper if the right scenarios are met, and are people playing mind games with us?

[rhs648]

I belong to an organization that is running a $70,000 deficit and will not be able to meet its payroll later in the year. It appears that raising additional money is not possible at this time. During a discussion, I suggested that we might have to terminate some of our paid people. You would not believe the booing. Drastic? Yes, but we still haven''t found a solution.

[misha128-2009]

Posted by WiccaOne at 03:59 PM : Feb 13, 2009

ALL HAT NO FACTS TEXAN spamming more lies.

Either their was a surplus based on the limited government definition of the budget or BUSH 43, Bush 41, Reagan followed by Clinton were THE BIGGEST DEFICIT spenders in the history of the country. Facts Rowdy refuses to accept.

[rhs648]

"What''''s In The Stimulus For Workers?"

Higher taxes and no possibility of retirement. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer courtesy of the government, which is operated by the rich for the benefit of the rich. Poor people aren''''t lazy, they''''re stupid.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by random_radar

Don''t forget your $13 per week tax cut. With gas going up again, you may not see any of it. On the bright side, President Obama promised a middle income tax cut and $13 per week keeps his word.

[rhs648]

the difference being you are not SITTING ON YOUR AZZ all day waiting for the postman to deliver a check. People in your situation by all means deserve whatever services are available to provide yourself the tool neccessary to succeed. My post was directed at(and beleive me I''''ve seen enough of this around Memphis) the majority who would rather except a handout than get off their lazy butts and work..Not all people of lower income are lazy I know, but my point is, the masses that are, are being enabled more so with the dangling of carrots..


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by rudedogrulz

And what better way to attract voters than to promise things to people. By promising health care, childcare, food stamps, rent subsidies, and welfare your party has a better chance of growing and controlling political party. It is very unpopular to say no. An idea going around now is subsidizing those who can''t afford their mortgage and are at risk of forclosure. Another giveaway guaranteed to attract more voters.

[random_radar]

"What''s In The Stimulus For Workers?"

Higher taxes and no possibility of retirement. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer courtesy of the government, which is operated by the rich for the benefit of the rich. Poor people aren''t lazy, they''re stupid.

[rhs648]

correction

Social Security is already done...this economic insanity spending will cause the government to rob what''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''s left of it...

Social Security is just another entitlement now...period.

Clinton already robbed most all of it trying to pump up his fathom surplus.


----------------------------------


------------------------------------
--
--
------

Posted by WiccaOne

WiccaOne - The part of social security that requires payroll contributions from employees and employers and returns money based on your contribution is not an entitlement. To receive the retirement benefit, you must work and contribute part of your paycheck before you receive the benefits. Any other social security benefits, if they exist, that don''t require that you work and contribute would be an entitlement. Things such as welfare and food stamps are entitlements because people can qualify for them without ever having worked or contributed to them.

[rhs648]

Social Security is already done...this economic insanity spending will cause the government to rob what''''''''''''''''s left of it...

Social Security is just another entitlement now...period.

Clinton already robbed most all of it trying to pump up his fathom surplus.


----------------------------------

--------------------------------------
--
------

Posted by WiccaOne

WiccaOne - The part of social security that requires payroll contributions from employees and employers and returns money based on your contribution is not an entitlement. To receive the retirement benefit, you must work and contribute part of your paycheck before you receive the benefits. Anything other social security benefits, if they exist, that don''t require that you work and contribute would be an entitlement. Things such as welfare and food stamps are entitlements because people can qualify for them without ever having worked or contributed to them.

[creighton266]

You know it''s easier said than done. Not all low income people are uneducated with a bunch of kids. Just as a single mother of 1 with a degree, making $10.00 and hour is considered above poverty, and because of that she is not entitled to any benefits. When Obama is speaking about low-income people, he''s not pertaining to these pathetic women, who are having a bunch of babies, while collecting public assistance, and making us hard working people pay for it. He''s talking about us people who are trying, yet are considered above poverty level, so we live pay check to paycheck and get no help. We are finally recognized and are hopefully getting some kind of relief. For those who sit on welfare for a living, should be forced to get their GED, attend a career school, and get a job, and they should be told, that if they refuse, all benefits will be terminated.

[rhs648]

and thank the government and their inability to keep their fat greedy hands out of the lock box for that. I swear...anyone who thinks the government can be trusted to run ***** needs a complete mental evaluation....and they''''re gearing up to get into healthcare...oh freakin'''' joy!!!!!!!!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by likeitis5050

You are correct. Part of the reason is because, like corporate CEOS, congressman only worry about the short term. Things like getting reelected every four years and bringing home the pork. That is why we don''t have a long term energy policy and why things such as Social Security and Medicare never get fixed.

[likeitis5050]

I hardly would qualify Social Security as socialism since it''''s benefits are predicated on an average of one''''s income financed by taxpaying citizens. Now if S.S was a set amount predetermind by the Government, I would agree..It''''s pointless to debate because wht remains of S.S. 20 years from now will amount to nothing



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by rudedogrulz

and thank the government and their inability to keep their fat greedy hands out of the lock box for that. I swear...anyone who thinks the government can be trusted to run ***** needs a complete mental evaluation....and they''re gearing up to get into healthcare...oh freakin'' joy!!!!!!!!!!

[likeitis5050]

Monopolies should be illegal like our Constitution dictates so Sovereign Governments can do the BIG projects that have no profit in them except benifit society as a whole.
Posted by whitemale09 at 11:04 AM : Feb 13, 2009


------------------
----------

-------
----------------


*** are you smoking pinko??

Are you speaking of the Constitution in Argentian you Hugo Chavez sounding POS??

For there certainly is nothing in the US Constitution to sustain what you obviously excreted from between your butt cheeks above.


----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------

Posted by DemsSuk1 at 02:24 PM : Feb 13, 2009

Hhahahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....whitemale has just come out of the closet...to heck with tiptoeing around socialism or communism...just toss it out there!!! Nice catch Demsukl...couldn''t have checked his commie azz any better!!!

[rhs648]

Oh sure, but being able to sell risky products to consumers doesnt remove the banks from responsibility....thats why we have government regulations to protect consumers from exploiting and abusing the public trust......


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by chitownfire1

And senators such as Barney Frank and Chris Dodd did such a great job. This was not deregulation. The regulations were in place. They simply failed to do their oversight properly. Most of us would be fired from our jobs for such incompetency or laxness or corruption or whatever the cause.

[rhs648]

Thank SOCIALISM for your medicare and social security checks old man!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by chitownfire1

That is not socialism. You confuse social policy with socialism. The government can provide services and programs without being socialistic and without owning the means of production. The government can even redistribute wealth without being socialistic as long as it allows the private ownership of the means of production.