I don't watch the View but I like Joy.  I say if the point of tax cuts is to stimulate the economy, give them to the poor people.  They know how to spend.  Rich people will just put it in a mutual fund.  That might help the rich people but it doesn't help the economy like a new TV or game system purchase will.  Okay I should be nice and say a car repair and new clothes but you get the idea. 

I believe she's getting paid by ABC/Disney/Barbara Wa-wa.

Not that those people are getting any real value out of the payments they make  

As to this by Loca:

*cough* b.s. *cough*

Sorry, but that is so patently untrue and bogus I have to call b.s. on the statement.

Poor people will spend.  Ok, I can agree with that.  But will they make wise choices in their spending or will they simply run off and buy something they didn't really need just because they think they have some extra income?  More likely the latter.

If those poor people are running out buying new clothing, new shoes, new tires for their car, fixing up their homes, or otherwise improving their quality of life beyond buying themselves a new HDTV, then great.  If not, then they are most likely wasting the money that was robbed from the rich so that they could spend it, and oh, yeah, by the way, will wind up back in the hands of the fairly wealthy business people that profit from the purchases that are made by those poor people when their stocks rise after good earnings reports, good sales reports, etc.

You (Loca) say that the rich people will just put it into a mutual fund.  Possibly.  Or they might possibly go trade in the 'benz to get a new one for Buffy or Muffy or whomever.   And that money will likely trickle it's way down through the economy (yes, trickle down does work to some extent).

If they put the money into a mutual fund though, who really cares?  Whose money is it that they are stealing to provide these benefits anyway?  uh, the wealthy, right?  Oooops, not really, it's the children and grandchildren of the wealthy who won't get big inheritances, and won't get all of the money that was earned in the generations prior as the government taxes that income and wealth away to redistribute it now.

Personally I think it would be great if the government handed everyone an investment in a mutual fund that had about an 80% penalty for early withdrawal -- meaning they put that "$1200" that they are giving couples into a mutual fund/certificate of deposit type investment that pays $1200 + interest and dividends (on the growth of the fund) after say a two year period if held that long, and continues to grow if held long term.  If cashed in earlier than two years the receipient loses 80% of the money so they can take the money and run if they really want, but will find they get almost nothing for having done so.

Best of all worlds though as it would really teach a lot of poorer individuals the value of investing in the market and let them grow their own wealth.

Too bad it won't happen.

You really need to take econ 101.  Your response here is so filled with just plain factual errors and faults in logic that it would take far to long here to respond to it.

So was Al Franken, but he was a failure at everything else as well.  Both have one thing in common.  An oversized ego that is not matched by an undersized brain.

Locamama, you seem like a nice person but you really do have no idea how our economy works.  Stop listening to Joy Behar!!

Whoopi pointed out that rich people donate a tremendous amount and Joy actually said "they have to".  What the hell?!  Whoopi then pointed out that they don't have to.  Rich people can save it, spend it, burn it if they want.  Who in their right mind would think the "have to" donate it?

Rich people, if they don't feel they are already being robbed by their government, invest in companies, donate to charities, start grants and funds for causes near and dear to their hearts. 

Our schools better start doing a better job educating our kids about economics or we will self destruct.  "Buy American", "More benefits for workers", "No outsourcing", "Tax the rich and give to the poor" all sound like the "right" things to believe.  We need to live in reality though.  We need to keep cause and effect in mind.  We have to keep reality in check and not lose ourselves in ideology.

Loca said:

okay, go ahead and try. Econ for dummies.

See my comments above.

Ask yourself how do 'rich' people get rich?

The answer isn't "because they inherited it {the wealth}," it has much more to do with being industrious enough, or smart enough to profit from their work or the work of people working for them, and/or from making smart investments that paid dividends that helped grow their wealth.

The wealthy aren't stupid.  They typically don't make stupid investments.  Look at Warren Buffet as an example.  The man is very careful about his investments but he has made himself and other investors in his company very, very wealthy.  Even the smallest of investors in his companies (people that have tiny little fractional amounts of stock in his company) make money on those investments.

As I said above, poor people tend to remain poor (sorry, I know it's generalizing in the worst ways, but can't be helped here) because they don't make wise investments or smart choices along the way.  Instead of saving for later they tend to spend immediately.  Instead of working harder to find a job that offers better benefits they go out and waste free time that could be used to look for new jobs.  They tend not to be well educated and tend not to go back and try to improve upon what little education they have because they don't have the money to do so.  What many fail to realize though is that there are tons of programs available to help them improve their educational status and gain new job skills, including through lots of charitable organizations, state programs and even federally funded programs to help them.  They aren't interested in real help, they are interested in handouts and once they get them they tend to waste them.

I remember (every now and then my faulty memory circuits) having mistakenly ass-u-me-d that you weren't in favor of the Bush tax cuts and you corrected me on that point.  You said you appreciated the money you got and spent it on things for you and your family.  That is great, and it was your decision.  You also could have invested the money if you wanted.  Perhaps you did.  Maybe you did some of both things. 

I have thoughts of investing the money that will be coming to my family.  I want to put it into an IRA for my wife.  She's not covered by any current retirement plan (short of Social Security).  I figure I can put a decent amount of the $1500 (give or take) that we should see into an IRA and she'll benefit much later when that money has had a chance to grow (assuming I make good choices on what stocks to buy with the money, or perhaps I just buy into a fund that will choose for us).

Am I rich?  Hell friggin' no.  Far from it.  Very far from it.  Far enough that I can't even see it in the distance.  But if I invest in a mutual fund am I an idiot just because I didn't run off and buy clothing made in a third world sweat shop?  Or if I don't buy an HDTV at Wally world?

Honestly, this whole stimulus package isn't much more than corporate welfare anyway.  It'll help Sears/K-Mart, and Wally world, and Best Buy and the like but only because there are people that will run off and instantly spend their money on new TVs.    Though I have plans for a new TV out of this year's tax refund, that is a small percentage of the money I'm getting back.  The wife wants a few things done around the house and wants to buy some furniture, so yet again, we'll do that.  Beyond that, we'll save as much as we can because as it turns out other expenses are eating us alive (including health insurance that is going to more than offset any yearly 'cost of living increase' I see at work).  Higher fuel prices, higher food prices, the need for more clothing, and other daily expenses.

Or, what is so wrong about saving it in a "mutual fund"?  If Everyone did so, we wouldn't have to pay even more for the Social Security "plan".

I think we should just even the field and have a flat rate.  I wonder how the "poor" would like a 33% tax instead of barely anything like they pay now?

The rich already pay more in taxes- they make more to tax and they get taxed at a much higher rate.

What really bugs me lately is people thinking that the rich should pay more.  Are we socialists?  What is the point of working your butt off to make money if you have to pay so much of it out in taxes to fund the "poor"?