E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn the wake of an alarmingly weak jobs report last week, President Barack Obama and lawmakers in both parties find themselves possessing few if any realistic options for jolting the economy out of its doldrums before Election Day.
Big-ticket items like payroll tax cuts, free-trade agreements, months of extended unemployment benefits and "stimulus" spending on public works and aid to states and local governments have been tried but have failed to spur a sustained, robust recovery.
Obama's $830 billion stimulus bill — a third of it tax cuts — enacted when he took office has pretty much run out, its impact the subject of heated debate on the campaign trail. At its peak in 2010, the stimulus measure accounted for at least 1 million jobs — and perhaps as many as 5 million — according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Many of those jobs, particularly in state and local government, have since disappeared. Republicans, empowered by mid-term election returns two years ago, now scoff at Obama's suggestion for another round of stimulus government spending.
Obama's remaining "to do list" for Congress contains a partial tax credit for new hires, extending tax breaks about to expire, renewing highway and mass transit construction programs and preventing interest rates on student loans from doubling. Even combined, they hold little promise of lifting a $15 trillion economy from its torpor.
What's missing are proposals to try to boost consumer demand — like a new round of tax cuts for individuals — or another set of big-spending "stimulus" proposals to pump federal dollars into the economy.
The "president is continuing to work with his team on potential new ideas" to jumpstart the economy, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday when pressed about the sagging rate of job growth.
The reality is the ideas coming from Obama are likely be the ones he has already proposed. There is no money and no political appetite for bolder ideas. And the White House has no confidence that Republicans in Congress would help him muscle through even smaller economic measures for fear it might be seen as helping his standing with voters.
"It's not okay to simply root for failure and hope it pays off politically," Carney told reporters.
Obama's jobs initiative last fall featured lots of campaign-style rallies in swing states but little real engagement with Republicans controlling the House or serving as gatekeepers in the gridlocked Senate. The initiative coincided with a lift in Obama's poll numbers but seemed to further alienate top Republicans like House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio.
Congress did enact a major chunk of Obama's jobs proposal last winter, extending unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and a two-percentage point cut in the Social Security payroll tax. Despite costing $150 billion, the package didn't provide any new stimulus for the economy since it prevented existing policies from expiring rather than establishing new ones. Lawmakers in both parties pretty much ignored Obama's call to make the payroll tax cut more generous and extend it to businesses.
For now, fixing the economy is mainly a messaging battle.
"I hope Republicans care more about their country than they do about winning the next election," said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.
Obama's "to do list" consists mainly of marginal initiatives such as a tax breaks for companies that move their operations back to the U.S., hire new workers or boost their payrolls. A similar payroll tax credit was in place in 2010 but didn't seem to do much to promote hiring. Economists say that companies hire workers based on how well their business is doing, rather than in response to tax incentives.
"Whether it's pretending that small-ball, Post-It Note quality proposals would have a major impact on the economy, or pretending that Republicans — who are the only ones actually working on bipartisan solutions — are somehow sitting on our hands, he's doing a major disservice to the American people," Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said of the president.
Republicans are offering some business tax breaks of their own. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., wants to let most businesses deduct 20 percent of their earnings when determining their tax bills. It's a nonstarter in the Democratic Senate.
House Republicans point to almost 30 bills they have passed that are now stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate. They include boosting offshore oil exploration, easing environmental regulations and forcing construction of the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline project from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. All are job creators, Republicans argue.
GOP leaders in the House also plan a vote before Congress recesses for the political party conventions on extending all of former President Bush's tax cuts due to expire Jan. 1. That alone, they say, would give businesses more certainty about their taxes and confidence to hire more people and make job-creating investments. Democrats will try to stop Republicans from forcing a vote on it in the Senate.
In the absence of action on Capitol Hill, some economy-watchers are hoping for the Federal Reserve to step in with a new round of "quantitative easing." That's when the Fed buys Treasury bonds so as to drive interest rates lower. But the 10-year bond is already at a record low as investors worried about Europe have sought the safe haven of U.S. securities.
And this close to the election, the Fed is mindful of the harm it could incur to itself if it's seen as goosing the economy to benefit Obama's election prospects.
Leave a Comment:
At this point, during a recession and with an election on the horizon, there aren't many options for either party to improve the economy. The most important thing they can try to do right now would be to strengthen consumer and business' confidence. That means no "raising taxes" (which includes letting certain tax cuts expire) and we can't cut spending (although reforming it to make it more efficient should be fine, so long as the results haven't changed much). Both parties will have a beef with one of those options, but that's the unfortunate truth of a recession.
That said, passing a proper budget for the first time since Obama's election would certainly speak volumes...
Noryc, I would disagree on the taxes part. Increasing the tax rate (or to some, reinstating the 2002 tax rate) on millionaires isn't going to affect the economy, and while it won't solve the deficit problems, it will help at least a little.
But I think the headline is right, there is little the government can do to drive the economy, and what it can do, it has already done.
Mr. President Republicans can't help you, remember you sent them to the back of the bus!
I knew we were screwed when Obama kept the same (Goldman Sachs) economic team from the previous administration. I guess he figured who better to get us out of this mess than the ones who created it.
He gambled, lost and now is paying for it.
GoJoBiden, you know that BSNBC and the liberal media are nothing but shills for this failed admin.
Unfortunately, the financial choices made to date have proven to be nearsighted and politically based at best. Congress has not passed a federal budget in 3 years, while hollering at one another about..... money! Some say that the stimulus is what kept the US from falling into a deeper recession/depression, I fall on the side of the other facts that say that cyclical adjustments happen when the markets overextend, then contract. Since we overspent massively for a long time, we have to accept the burdon of those decisions, allow the economy to adjust, and then to move forward again. The stimulus only changed the angle of the fall and added additional debt on top of the debt problem. It failed, was maligned for cronie projects, and was reallocated to things not initially in the plan.
So now the federal government is faced with "What next?" They just bought up a lot of European Euro credit swaps to help prop the EU, but it's looking like that's failing too. So the debt we propped up will fail and our dollar/debt will have problems again. So they can QE some more- great, just printing more to dilute the dollar. That'll work.
There are plenty of options available, the administration and the libs just don't want to do them. The key part of the article is that Obama and the libs have tried this, that and the other thing and they haven't worked. So, what's their solution? More of this, that and the other thing that haven't worked. Of course, then it's the repubs fault because they weren't allowed to do more of this, that and the other thing.
The only solution to the mess is to give the current administration and those in Congress who insist on more of the failed this, that and the other thing a permanent vacation beginning January 20, 2013!
Oh, and don't be fooled. Obama thinks he's been very successful. More unemployed people dependent on government is his idea of success. The bringing of America to it's knees from debt is his idea of success. The loss of US influence and power around the world is his idea of success. All you have to do is listen to what he has said and watch what he has done to know it.
"The amount of federal debt held by the public is projected later this year to surpass70 percent of the nation's annual economic output", the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday in a report that spotlighted the stark choices policymakers face on taxation and government spending.
Federal debt held by the public in 2008 stood at about 40 percent ot the gross domestic product.
2008 was the last year of a republican Congress budget. Does anyone see what the democrat policies are doing to us? It isn't just the President, it is the progressive democrats agenda that has to be stopped. No wonder they don't write a budget, they wouldn't dare put their financial ideas down on paper. Why would anyone thinking American vote for a progressive democrat? There afre good democrats out there but it is getting harder to find them.
Mark, All it will do is serve up your need to make people who have that higher income level be punished for daring to earn that much. When I see someone drive by in a new Rolls or a Ferrari I say...man nice car I would love to drive one. When liberals (the ones that cant afford the car) see one they say..... I hate that guy driving that expensive gas guzzler.....who does he think he is. He should be driving a ford focus like me.....bastard. Class jealousy has gotten so bad here in Detroit that its a norm for people downtown to just take peoples cars at gunpoint. Even prominent people Rev Winans (a very prominent man here) Was jacked at a gas station so they could drive around in his purple Lexis.
1. more government-initiated investment
When private businesses are still fearful of uncertainty, government should step in to invest to keep up demand
2. continue much of Bush tax cut for another year or 2 years - but do some homework to limit the scope of tax cut - only giving to those who REALLY NEED the tax cut
3. closing tax loopholes to boost revenue - too many giveaways to corporations should be ended.
"President Barack Obama and lawmakers in both parties find themselves possessing few if any realistic options for jolting the economy out of its doldrums before Election Day. "..Interesting Obama gets all the blame yet congress, both parties have done nothing in reality to help this economy..the republicans for sure have made clear they will do anything to get Obama out,including the further ruining of this country..I have to assume that many find that to be acceptable....We are fast becoming a nation who cares not one bit about our own..just the wealthy few...and those who for whatever reason think that Romney and the republican party care about this nation as a whole. No part of congress is with out blame in this ruined economy...both party's have created this mess..but...only the middle class, those on social security..and the elderly who have no help other than from us, the tax payers wil be the ones to pay...while the wealthy live high.
What would really be better to do here is to just change gears. The options are few, because we have decided not to try any methods that were sure fire ways to jump start the economy. What would be wise here is to utilize job vehicles (like Keystone) to help the United States get out of the slump that its in (). Doing this would not only alleviate some of our immediate problems, but would also help to create the jobs like the ones in green energy that we've been trying to utilize a source of labor but has not come to pass. Use your current resources to help build future ones, it's pretty straightforward.
People in Detroit are jacking cars out of class jealousy? that's one of the funniest comments I've read in a long time. How about they're uneducated and unemployed but still need $ for their drugs and booze and figure they might as well do it the easy way?
Gil- You'll note that in DC they are now more interested in 5 year old legislation for "fairness of paychecks" rather then creating jobs. Pure idiot vote pandering during an election season rather than trying to do something valuable (not saying that equal pay for equal effort isn't good, but it's not a new concept nor new legislation- just rehash for political expediency). It would go against their grain to admit that certain decisions (that they made to get power/votes) weren't in the people's/contry's best interests and turn back on them. They believe that admitting mistakes and failures makes you weak and not a better leader through perspective and changing of direction.
My take- Completely change the tax laws to a Fairtax model, cutting out the caveats and loopholes, note 5-10 year economic goals and allow for transition to slowly occur (IE- Get off oil. Well that takes time, you can't just declare we are off oil now). Then use the power of government to encourage creativity and job creation (X prizes for energy goals, etc.)- a much better spend of a few hundred million than the billions wasted daily by doing what the government thinks is best. Think about strategic needs and work with them (like our energy sources- Alaska pipeline deminishing, options in the states, coordination with Canada, bringing the process of creating energy up to today's potentials, noting that other countries are making runs for Alaskan oil, the arctic resources, etc. You have to wake up to the realities of what's coming- the world is changing and ANY turmoil will hurt us. If we LEAD the world by reinforcing our supplies, encouraging growth and prosperity, working within our budgets, etc. we can be in a far better position for the rocky moments.
The one thing the administration seems to be very reluctant to do is to sit down with business leaders and see what can be done to make the US a more attractive place to run a company. I don't advocate removing all environmental and safety regulations, but there is a middle ground.
Removing bad regulations and changing trade policies to favor US manufacturing doesn't cost anything (ok, a few bureaucrats will lose their jobs - but I'm ok with that), so I don't see why we are not aggressively pursuing these angles.
This is your economy.
This is your economy on Obama.
Any questions?
That would probably involve the law prof actually talking to people. Not gunna do it.
This government has a spending problem.
Governments cannot give anything with out first taking it from someone else.
Politics is supposed to be the 2nd oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the 1st.
During their private session in January 2009, Bush passed to Obama 4 sealed envelopes marked 1,2,3,4, and advised to open each on the 1st of November of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th year of term, according to the numbers, if things don't go well.
Obama opened #1 on 10/1/2009, and the enclosed message was: "Blame everything on me".
#2 on 10/1/2010: "Promise, promise, promise!"
#3 on 10/1/2011: "Tell them the success is near, and you already see the light at the end of the tunnel."
#4 on 10/1/1012: "Prepare 4 envelopes."
aw hell, there are lots of things that Obama can do to improve the economy, lower energy prices and start consumer sentiment on the road to recovery:
1. Drill baby Drill - Anwar and the coastlines
2. Keystone Pipeline.
3. roll back spending to 2008 levels
4. Give EVERYONE an Obama care waiver for 3 years
5. Fire all the Czars and repeal any environmental regulations and limitation imposed in the last 3 years by them
All he has to do is SAY he is going to do all that- the economy will rally almost immediately. He does not even have to DO any of it - just say it. Then he can go back to business as usual after he wins.
He can not and will not do it however. Because a) he is an amateur, b) does not believe in any of it and c) he is an idiot and has always been an idiot.
He is so over his head he'd need a step ladder to breath.
"I hope the Democrats care more about their country than they do about winning the next election," said Allen-968499, Independant alienated by race baiters and name callers from the D party-Texas
Democrats care about the future of America, because they are made up of people who care about families. The Repuiblicans only care about greed for the 1%. Look where the money for them is coming from. Listen to their words, its not rocket science.
Thanks for typing that it made me laugh out loud. Do you have anymore comedy?
txout: yea, it's the 1% is paying Owebama $1,200.00 a plate for breakfast in LA. Even Slick Willy calls for continuation of Bush era tax cuts to be continued. Owebama is controlled by Wall Street and his crony Kapitalism is the thorn of any recovery efforts. Did I forget overrregulation and the threat of higher taxes? keep your expensive gasoline, high unemployment, recession, underwater mortgages and Czars: the Independents will roll your ideology in November.
Not many options? WRONG>>> He could approve KEYSTONE pipe line...but wait...TransCanada Selected by Shell and Partners to Develop Multi-Billion Dollar Natural Gas Pipeline to Canada's West Coast .
He could settle the tax increase due in 6 months...
He could put a moratorium on new regulations...cost $0!
He could renew the pledge on support of the banks...the banks currently have $1.5 trillion in excess reserves...up from $200 Billion in 2007.
He could listen to Main Street small business and not Wall street and the multinationals and then do something...
His problem is he spends his day chasing donations instead of being a positive catalyst to fix problems...
All not likely...Clinton pivoted in 97...almost year before the election... time may have run out...and with Wisconsin the tide has changed...
If Republicans do that, that would mean that Republicans are reneging on the deal they made with President Obama that if they didn't come up certain solutions by Jan 1, that programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid would be cut on the Dem side, and the Bush Tax Cuts would expire on the Repub side.
So effectively, Republicans have TRICKED us by putting our programs at risk, while they push through their programs for the Rich without respect to the agreement they made on raising the debt level. Republicans backstabbing the American People = Typical.
Obama/Biden 2012
TO: John-2032532 who wrote:
Well, it's the one w inherited from the Republicans who screwed it up and the REPUBLICANS FAILED to take any part in getting the economy moving again, which I why I wouldn't trust Republicans to be able to do any more than they've already done, which is screw up the economy and then FORCE the economy to say f'd up.
Republicans will say ANYTHING to avoid taking Responsibility for THEIR FAILURES and for REPUBLICANS RUNNING THE ECONOMY INTO THE GROUND.
Everytime Republicans try to put their filth on the POTUS, we will be here to set the record straight.
Obama/Biden 2012
This might be a fresh idea for the American Girl. Voters lost interest in Obama's excuses a long, long time ago.
American Girl , , , , ,hhahahaha
You obviously cannot remember what happened less than 2 years ago . . .
From Jan 2, 2009 until January 5th [somewhere in there] 2011 - President Obama had clear majorities in BOTH houses of Congress - he and the Democrats could have undone and 'fixed' anything they wanted - did they? Nope. Obama owns where we are now - lock stock and barrel.
"Elections have consequences, John and you lost."
"Don't call my bluff, Eric."
Well at least we know you are bluffing, you amateur.
Here is a suggestion for Senate Democrats. STOP BLOCKING HOUSE JOB LEGISLATION AND DO SOMETHING!
AMERICAN GIRL,
Their filth?
How many times have you called out the Obama administration for their lies?
Every sulution involves taxing the rich and giving more to someone else.
Did you know that when the government took over student loans, they took 10 billion dollars from it and applied it to Obamacare? That the Democrats set up the date for student loans interest rates to go up?
The bubble was a world credit bubble. Look at where we are now, we are headed for the same thing but with countries. You thought the housing bubble was bad, just imagine what it is going to be like when all of these countries including the United states cannot pay their bills?
We now have a debt ratio to world GDP of 20-23 percent. If we follow President Obama's budget plan for the next ten years, that debt ratio will increase to 28-30 percent.
Who the heck do you think is going to have money left to borrow businesses if we suck all the money out of the market?
Did you stand up and honest democrats tell you that? President Bush was not a fiscal Conservative.
I will agree that he added to our deficit. I have always stated that I was against us being in Iraq and Afghanistan. I still am, I am also against us doing anything in Libya or Syria.
President Obama has been in office for over 3 years, he needs to stand up and take the responsibility for the way things are now.
His change has been the same ole same ole from day one.
To American Girl-724855
When Obama was elected, unemployment was 6.5%. Businesses began to react then to what he was promising to do if elected. They knew that their costs were going up because of several things, like Health Care Reform, and stopped filling jobs. They knew they could not afford the extra costs for their existing work force much less any additional employees. One year later unemployment was up to 10%. I know it is easier to blame anyone other than President Obama, but open your eyes and admit to what is obvious to anyone who is remotely unbiased. President Obama got a chance and he has failed. He has not even met the spending limits that he and Congressional Democrats passed in 2008!
actually I think we need to all get together and give American Girl a group hug!!!
It will be ok we have until december 21st 2012 before the world ends.
We Americans are spoiled kids, willing to go without NOTHING! We talk big then whine when tough measures are required. We like to BLAME rather than search for solutions.
The Corporations that should be hiring know they have the SCOTUS in one pocket and CONGRESS in the other. They will not do anything to piss off shareholders whose GREED is insatiable. Screw the little worker, make them work longer, harder, and for less - do not hire new.
We need a revolt in this country, and I don't think we are far from it. The carpetbaggers are picking our bones and licking their lips. We are a new 2 class society.
There is plenty they could do, but nothing they will do because the need the pocket money. They need to threaten new taxes on all Companies that do not increase their workforce over 10 % from the previous year. Production and services sent overseas get heavy tariffs.
We must do the tough things better and quicker.
President Obama brought this bad economy on himself. His rhetoric attacked all business (large and small), attacked Wall Street and scared over half the population. All businesses, even after hiring consultants, still can't figure out how the Obamacare will impact their costs. With so much uncertainty and fear, we are stagnating. Most businesses and banks have historically high cash reserves. But, there is no demand.
The president's stimulus was poorly focused and consequently, the results were mediocre at best. Investing in "green" energy knowing full well that the same strategy failed in a European country, was simply foolish and a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. It would have never created enough jobs to jump start the economy (although counting garbage collectors, antique dealers etc as green jobs, the results could be misleading).
Well, technically the public debt is roughly 76% and was 44% of GDP, respectively.
Hold on there, JH. You fail to mention why the debt skyrocketed. For one thing, it was the recession. In case you forgot, during recessions spending on social programs like Medicaid and food stamps increase and tax revenue decrease thanks to layoffs. The reason why our deficits topped $1 trillion was because it was piled on top of the Bush deficits, a reminder of how Bush violated economic law by running deficits during a good economy. Nearly a third of our deficit comes from the Bush tax cuts, passed by a REPUBLICAN Congress. Progressive Democrats, like myself, are all for fiscal responsibility, but we oppose premature austerity. We can't afford austerity during this rough recovery. Mitt Romney himself said that cutting spending during a rough economy would only make things worse. That is what happened in 1937, and that is what's going to happen in the first half of 2013. However, fear not, for when that fiscal cliff happens, the Bush tax cuts will disappear and our deficits and debt will fall over the next decade. That will hopefully placate the credit agencies and allow us to focus on rebuilding our infrastructure, fixing our schools, and repair our economy, both now and in the long-term.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
marlen101917
Marlen 101917, yours is the most meaningful post so far. When I saw that Obama had picked some of the same guys responsible for the recession as his advisors, I knew we were in trouble. My problem is, I'd rather eat a turd than vote for any Republican, whose policies led to the ressesion.
Obama should have gone for broke and gone after the Wall Street criminals and simply pulled all our troops out of the middle east. While the power structure would be pissed, he'd get reelected in a heart beat. Some say he ended the Iraq war but we still have many thousands of troops and Mercenaries there to make sure the International Oil Companies get the oil. As to the many many thousands of mercenaries, my take on them is they will become the "Royal Guard" once the Far Right Wing takeover is complete.
I almost can no longer watch the news. This country has lost most of the gains made since the great depression. I know plenty about that since I grew up during that Depression. Unions, Corporations, Politicians and the Supreme Court have screwed up totally by betraying our trust.
Our current depression is far worse than the Great depression since the world has changed and we can't seem to win a war. The WW2 victory made the world into our oyster since we had the energy and resources to lead the world in income. We no longer have that. Also, regardless of all the fuss about gas prices and who is responciple, there is no such thing as American oil, only world oil. We can drill until we come out the other side of the planet and the cost of gas and oil will still be due to the WORLD market.
We are screwed and if there should be a Republican Victory in the Congress and White House, we will become the Neo third world country.
While I'm at it, When the money people refused to back the resurgeance of the auto industry, even as there are trillions of dollars held off shore, and the government had to back them, we still find that the big money creeps are still holding it waiting for Americans to be dumb enough to vote for Republicans so they can bring the money back here and make us a low wage society so they can get even richer on our backs. Even voting for Democrats one will have to hold their nose but they are the lesser of the evils.
pigotry
Create demand? Like for a Chevy Volt?
How about a solar panel? Oh, that's right, they will give me a tax credit for it in April of 2013 and I certainly don't even have the cash for one, and My income is low right now with my mortgage underwater. The bank won't give me a loan because I now need 20% down instead of 10% down.
Pigotry you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. The horse has a better sense of when the water is poisionous than you do.
You might not like the inmates of the asylum, but if you get out of their way, you will have a lot less problems.
Ron
Obama has sat down with business people several times. Mostly all I see is increased regulations, not reductions. Why have meetings when you are not going to take those invited concerned parties advice?
How about billions spent on the "star wars program" and naval ships floating in docks collecting barnacles??? Under your Ronald Reagan God?? He knew how to spend on worthless programs too.
The fact is we saw a deep recession that had it's beginnings in 2007, in some parts of the country, a depression, and most economists poing to 2014 for a hopeful vibrant economy to start, so I doubt if you exchange Obama for Romney or Mickey Mouse that too much will occur. People are not spending because personal debt is high and therefore, spending is not happening.
Bill and American Girl
When Obama overtook Hillary in may 2008 the unemployment rated jumped by about a half point and started rising at .2 per month. Unemployment froze at 6.1% for August and September. And then continued up faster than before the conventions.
Was it Obama who was going to punish wall street? Was it the crash? Was it both?
I think it is both.
President Obama's problem now isn't what Wisconsin did, it's how he looks each day—careening around, always in flight, a superfluous figure. No one even looks to him for leadership now. He doesn't go to Wisconsin, where the fight is. He goes to Sarah Jessica Parker's place, where the money is.
NOBAMA 2012!
Jobless claims and phony math
The Obama administration has a real problem with math. It is not that they don't understand it, but rather they understand it too well and cannot resist the temptation to futz with the numbers.
Do you realize that for 66 out of the last 67 weeks the preceding week's unemployment number has been revised UPWARD? Big deal right? Not so. As an example, Obama's administration will announce a jobless claim week of say 375,000 only to revise it upward to 385,000 the next week so they can claim jobless claims have dropped to 382,000 rather than increasing. Just Google "US Jobless Claims" and work your way backwards. Democrats actually believe the jobless claims are falling for the umpteenth straight month.
Further, the media (Reuters, MSNBC, CBS, Huff, etc) is famous for hanging a headline on the article reporting a jobless claim drop knowing full well no one will read the article where it will state the preceding week's numbers were revised upward. The article will compare the week's data to a four week rolling average and do some analysis but Dems only read the headline.
Stop allowing yourselves to be lied to Democrats. You really are better than that and I expect more of you even if you don't for yourselves.
This economic collapse started in 2007 under a Republican, and we are not looking just at a recession we are looking at a deep recession/depression, which will probably linger on until around 2014. Bottom line- the American people in general have carried way too much personal debt for years and are saturated in that debt therefore, cannot purchase. You can have all the tax breaks in the world, you can frack all you want, until people start buying widgets, whatever those widgets are, this economy stays bogged down!!
This economic collapse started in 2007 under a Republican,
with a Democrat House and Senate.
Come on Paul, your desperation is showing.
For PMSNBC this is actually a fairly accurate article. There ARE few options left for Obama to further wreck this economy. He has done just about everything he could possibly do to damage this economy and only a few options left to further damage the economy.
Go to ANY economics textbook and read the section on what should be done to recover from a recession and Obama has done the opposite in EVERY case!!
1) The government should reduce as much uncertainty as possible. What did Obama do?
ObamaCare: He pushed his ObamaCare that has raised incredible uncertainty. Will it be found unconstitutional. If not will it be repealed. If it DOES get fully implemented what will be the cost to businesses and consumers (nobody knows including the government themselves).
Taxes: He has flipped and not made a commitment either way. Income tax? He first said he would not raise taxes during a recession. Last year the existing tax rates were extended ONLY one year!! What kind of "certainty" is that? Now threatening taxes on the "rich" but is that millionaires? Or $250,000 or more? Will it pass? That is ALL uncertainty.
Financial Reform: Dodd-Frank bill is a cluster$#%$. Nobody knows WHAT it really means. What will be the cost. What will the process be to fully implement. Businesses don't know so they wait.
2) Stimulus: John Maynard Keynes stated that "stimulus" is needed which can be done by EITHER the government spending AND/OR tax cuts to businesses and consumers so THEY can spend. However, Keynes was quite clear and stated that a country should not carry debt and any government spending be from an "emergency fund". Secondly, ANY government spending MUST be within the economy itself spending money to stimulate BUSINESS!! This can be by buying computers from Best Buy or pizzas from Pizza Hut. Infrastructure has limited stimulus (because if a road is being built a restaurant is not going to expand based on the "new" customers from the road crew. The restaurant is aware that once the road is done those "customers" will be gone. Infrastructure has limited stimulus). So what does Obama do?
Infrastructure: "Shovel ready". Yea, right. So the infrastructure purchases couldn't even occur but they don't work anyway as a stimulus.
Pensions: Some of the "stimulus" was used to balance state and government pensions. That is NOT stimulus because NOTHING WAS EVER PURCHASED!!
Taxes: (refer to #1 above). It is IMPOSSIBLE to "stimulate" the economy when you take a similar amount OUT of the economy at the same time. Scenario: Say gvmt spent $100 billion but increased TAXES $100 billion to pay for it. There is NO GAIN!! Yes PUBLIC sector increased spending $100 billion but PRIVATE sector would DECREASE about $100 billion (actually not exactly $100 billion due to what is called the Consumption Function but would take too long for me to explain it to you). End result is trying to "stimulate" the economy and AT THE SAME TIME threatening increased taxes the stimulus becomes ineffective.
My post is getting lengthy so I will stop. End result is EVERYTHING Obama has done goes AGAINST what every economics textbooks states to recover from a recession. End result? Still in a recession. We MUST get this incompetent president out of the white house before he damages this economy so badly that it will take decades to recover!!
@ratioanalamerican- you have been mis-informed. This economy started 2002-3 under Bush and, briefly, a divided, then Republican congress.
If you don't understand what led up to the current mess, there is little chance you will ever have a good idea what to do about it.
@probusiness-
"any economic textbook" You'd have a tough time proving that. Given that economists, practitioners of a soft almost mushy," science rarely agree, it seems you are being less than accurate.
"Certainty" has become the last refuge of scammers and neo-fascists. It has little relevance. Everybody operating with the kind of money in question is pretty certain about what they'll do if they get a 4% tax increase on earnings over the cutoff point. This point is just BS.
Obamacare: Given studies estimating 20-40,000 unnecessary deaths a year among people who can't afford health care, everyone opposing Obamacare (none of whom want change) are advocating mass negligent homicide. Given that business and industry complained for years about the cost of private health insurance, those who advocate simply getting rid of it as a benefit are also advocating negligent homicide on a massive scale. I will agree with you that in the US, a balkanized country on its way to becoming a second world country, not that many people with the power or money to have influence care about this. Given that Obama himself did not particularly want Obamacare, but took what he could get from republican party neo-fascists and democratic party neo-republicans, it really is not all that hard to plan for. After all, Wallmart for many years planned a pay scale that would put workers on some mix of medicaid and food stamps. The "uncertainty" of Obamacare is a chimera.
Stimulus- a third went to tax cuts. I would think that would get a one third approval. As for the rest, it was too small and it was given to states. I would agree that giving large amounts of money to states, most of which cannot do anything more complicated than choosing the Official State Bird, could have been a mistake.
On "Taxes" you provided a scenario but didn't say anything.
And finally, on financial reform: Dodd-Frank was what they could accomplish in a congress where 99% of the republicans and 45% of the democrats are lickspittles of Wall Street.
So we end up in a situation where the low rent (i.e., bigoted) republicans whine about socialism while socialism for corporations continues unabated, and high rent republicans whining about the INCREDIBLE PARALYZING UNCERTAINTY, of possibly having to pay 4 or 5% more of income over a quarter million or a million or whatever.
Give me a break. Why don't you simply assert that American workers should get less, Wall Streeters should be able to practice all the fraud they want, and that the top 20% should not have 84% of the country's wealth, but rather 95% of it.
No Rational AmeriCAN it started when you have no funding for two astronomically expensive wars all the while you are dishing out tax breaks and calling that fiscally responsible, then you have a Rep. Paul Ryan going around saying entitlements are solely to blame for a debt crisis. Then you have Republicans that can share blame for encouraging companies to go global and use,I mean abuse slave labor around the world. Slave labor that has zero workman comp, when they are injured their DONE. Done like Romney type done, finished, like dismantling a company, reorganizing it and shipping jobs to slave labor, and call it the AMERICAN WAY!! The American way to GREED. $250 million worth of greed. His wife has 2 Cadillacs, and he ties his dog to the roof while traveling.
@guylittle, who was complaining about the government giving things to some that it takes from others.
Guy, I propose this: you give nothing to the government and you forego everything the government, at all levels, provides for you. Including putting a huge sign on your house: Do Not Extinguish If Burning. And on your car, big signs on each door: Do Not Rescue Injured Driver or Passengers. And keep your butt off the Interstates. And fly only on planes not covered by federal safety regulations. Etc., for a couple hundred pages worth of et ceteras.
Cool with that, are we?
@Jim D: Why can't you liberals differentiate between federal and local government? Just because somebody wants less federal government does not mean they don't want to fund the police and fire department. What an ignorant point.
Stay off interstates? Is he going to get a reduction of all federal taxes paid at the gas pump? I don't think I have heard a more uneducated comment.
Few options for Obama? He'll do what he's been doing for the past almost 4 years which is to print up a bunch more of increasingly worthless dollars and spread them around (mostly to his union cronies) then sit back and wait for something to happen.
He knows this approach hasn't worked previously, but maybe, he thinks, this time will be different. What's that definition of insanity again?
There is no need to worry. The President said that the stimulus "did its job" so we no longer have to worry about unemployment. If we believe the President then despite any data to the contrary, unemployment is no longer an issue. The problem was solved by the stimulus bill that congress passed.
Without conditions to include any action of congress, the President promised the nation that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. Despite any data to the contrary, the President promised that would happen therefore it will happen. Congress does not need to do anything because the President has solved all of our economic problems so the congress should feel free to go on vacation. Contrary to the constitution, the President is now dictating the laws of the land so the congress does not have to. Maybe the President will start making all Supreme Court decisions himself so that the justices will also be free to go on vacation. All hail the Chief!
For crying out loud Mr. Pres, push a plan/vision of a new WPA & CCC type public works program and get this damn country going on the infrastructure rebuilds and repairs that are crucial to our SAFTEY as well as our economic well-being.
Quit nibbling around the edges and force the Republican hand in a big public way regarding putting this country back to work.
Go big or we all go home...at least those who still have a home.
K man, I think Obama's tried that in a few different ways, such as with the Stimulus, but it's been blocked by the republicans.
Mark enough of blaming the Republicans...where is the budget? Where are all the job bills proposed by the right? Harry Reid will not even bring them to the floor. Time is running out, when is the left going to face their failures?
Kman - just how do you propose to PAY for that? In case you hadn't been paying attention, we are currently in debt to the tune of US: $15,673,229,738,379 - Debt as of May 2012.
Watt, the issue at hand is spurring demand to help the economy recover.
The budget is certainly an issue but it's a different issue. Trying to solve all our problems at the same time is futile.
If Romney wins he will blame Obama and hide in excuses like all the prior Presidents. If Obama wins he will say his plan needs more time to "develop". No single person can change such a vast world and the time to put aside party sides is at hand to change for the better.......
Seven2Seven - I hope we get the chance to see what Romney will do if he wins, but I seriously doubt that you will hear him blame Obama for anything. That is not what winners do. Hmmm, what does that make the current president?
In theory, I agree with deficit stimulus spending in bad economic times if it's done according to Keynesian economics (deficit spend today on projects that will generate private sector growth in the future). After all, why not borrow money at 2% - since you only need to have a 3 or 4% return to make it worthwhile (maybe even less)?
The problem I see is, government is very inefficient in how it spends money. Only about 10 or 15% of the last stimulus bill went to infrastructure. Most of the rest was spent on projects like the multi-million dollar turtle crossing in my home town, paying union worker salaries, given to the NEA, etc.
So, if government spends 80% of the stimulus on non-stimulative projects, that means they need to get at least a 10% return on those projects - which is very unlikely, and why I do not support additional stimulus spending.
Kman (and, to grilledcheesesandwich's point), more and more stimulus spending only gets us further into debt. As of 4-30-12, US federal debt to GDP was 101.3%. Italy, one of the PIIGS going to slaughter, was recently at 120% debt to GDP. Depending on growth and federal deficit assumptions, we'll be at 120% debt to GDP in 3 to 5 years (5 years, at 2% growth and $1.0T deficits; 3 years, at 1% growth and $1.3T deficits). What you propose only pushes us towards the edge of the cliff faster.
SevenSeven, I disagree with you completely. Yes a single man can change the world. Obama is a divider and can never be that man. The world runs completely on perception, don't fool yourself. Much of the world sees Obama as the biggest mistake America has ever made. Can Romney change that perception? I hope so.
Socialism is great until you run out of other peoples money.
They already did that - don't you remember 'shovel ready infrastructure jobs?" You know - the one they pissed almost a trillion away on? All we got here were a few signs -
grilledcheese...
Well, for starters:
Allow the Bush tax cuts to expire...at a minium for top earners
Enact a transactional tax on Wall Street trades
Fix the ridiculous hedge fund tax loopholes
Fix the tax loopholes that allow folks like Mitt Romney to siphon off huge amounts of U.S. financial capital out of our economic system and park it off-shore basically tax free
End big oil and big ag subsidies
Get the f*%k out of Afghanistan
Unlike Obama, Romney has never blamed anyone else for anything in his life. He never had to.
high speed trains for every town.
light rail to every door.
new football stadiums for every city.
new computers for everyone.
better cell phones for the poor.
coupons for tattoos and piercings.
every home owner should receive a new shovel.
cable tv for everyone
prime rib in every pot
@John, Romeny never blamed anyone as he just took the money and ran. He closed many businesses and had a terrible record in Mass. He just move on like a devouring Death Star to the next victim. No blame and no remorse. I agree with you that he never had to blame based on his lifelong tactics.........
Romney is not an answer, jobs are not going to come down from the clouds like pea sized hail. Tax cuts do not generate anything necessarily but more debt. If it did, then why are we in this recessionary tailspin after 10 years of Bush tax cuts???? Example: in 2007 Bush and congress passed a bill to cut everyone a check for $1425 for people earning under $250,000 and told to take that check and spend it on consumables. What did 65% of those people do??? Paid off debt or put it in savings, therefore nullifying the attempted stimulus that probably wouldn't of done much anyhow.
@K-man, yeah, you're right, but he can't do it without legislation from congress and he can't get the legislation from congress.
Obama's problem is that he won't take it to the streets. He won't attack, despite having both logic and the facts on his side. Even after being spat at and told that they will do anything to bring him down, he still tries to talk rationally about compromise when the neo-fascists have shown him again and again that they will accept only everything they want.
The GOPiggies took one look at him and hated him. He needs to do what Roosevelt did: go out every day and excoriate them and EARN that hatred, double-down on that hatred. But he doesn't seem to have the personality for it.
Capitalism is great when you can charge 24.99% interest!! And call it legal.
There's One Surefire thing Hussein Zero could do to "jumpstart" the economy before election day. Announce he is NOT seeking a second term. Businesses would start hiring, the stock market would soar and the People would REJOICE!
You are so right Alan.
Alan, do you think that consumers will all of a sudden start buying more product (consumers comprise roughly 2/3 of our GDP) because Obama is no longer president? Or that companies will hire people even though they have no additional orders, or make investments even though thought the economy still has excess capacity?
Or do you think, as most economists do, that demand for goods and services must increase before businesses start hiring? If you ascribe to the second school of thought, what exactly do you think ROmney could do to make consumers buy stuff they can't currently afford to buy?
Alan?
Mark Thomas-371822,
Having a long term tax strategy (such as Obama leaving) would spur corporate and venture capital investment that has been sitting on the sidelines for several years. My business develops new products and I know first hand that there is capital waiting to be invested, but since the return on that investment cannot be predicted beyond a 6 month to 1 year window due to proposed tax increases, the investors prefer to just wait.
Another example is the new medical device excise tax. Will it really be implemented on January 1, 2013? Will the courts repeal Obamacare? A bill has been proposed in the house to repeal it, but will it be even voted on in the senate? Until these kind of issues are resolved, it's better to wait on investment until a 5 or 10 year plan can be made.
Arm, businesses don't stop developing new products and making more products becasue their effective tax rate goes from 11% (which it is right now) to, say, 15%. Tax rates were higher under Clinton but the economy was twice as strong. It's a false claim. Who in their right mind says "I'm not going to make a new product because I'll realize only a 20% return instead of a 22% return?
Same with the medical devices. Explain to me why a medical device manufacturer would say to their stockholders, "we're not developing any new products because the tax rate may go up a few percentage points'? I run a small business and I wouldn't be here very long if I told the owners that.
It certainly has some affect, but negligible.
well said Alan. I come from a family of business owners, they would for sure do more. They have put off so much waiting to see what happens with him as Prez.
I know my CEO, (and I am the IT lead for NA/LA/CA) in his quarterly meeting last month and the previous investors meeting told everyone that there are two items holding back hiring in EMEA and NA. 1. Was the current banking situation in EMEA and the report that auto sales would be down 20 to 30% in the coming fiscal year, and that the current American adminstration need to harness business with rules and regulations that cant be adjusted for on the fly. He and his peers feel its better to sit on the cash and wait until they are sure of the climate. Sorry but thats the story! Mark but they do choose to make that NEW part in a country where its more cost effective to make it.... which at this point is NOT Europe or NA. China and Mexico for instance.
jolly, companies choose to manufacture in CHina or other developing countries becasue the wage rates are so low, primarily, and secondarily because of access to local markets. Taxes are a consideration but not the factor driving the decision. Keep in mind that payroll constitutes an expense orders of magnitude greater than tax expense and that the economy thrived during the 90's, and before, when tax rates were higher.
The worst thing a business can do is to sit on cash when there are orders to fill. No one in their right mind does that. When the orders flow, they invest.
Cut taxes and costly regulations. Businesses invest more and hire more. Consumers purchase more. Tax rates are cut but tax revenues increase. Voila.
factcheckero - You are exactly right! However, the dems will never admit that this is true even though it happens every time tax rates are cut. They cannot admit that federal income tax revenues INCREASED during the Bush administration after the dreaded "Bush Tax Cuts" were put in place. The problem is that for every tax dollar that comes in, congress spends more!
And another thing, democrats need to stop talking about "paying for" tax cuts. They pay for themselves every time... Spending is the problem, not revenue!
Mark your wrong, in these times we are cutting our deliveries to bare minimums. In anticipation that global purchasing will be flat this year and into the foreseeable future. All contractors are being evaluated to see if they are going to be retained and most hiring in NA and EMEA has to be approved at a senior VP level and approved by a C level person. To show you how much concern there is our CEO (60,000k employee company) has to approve EVERY smart phone employees receive.
Mark,
I don't know where your 11% tax rate comes from... Unless you are a giant, multinational corporation (GE, ATT, etc.) Your tax rate is 38% on profits l<$500,000 and 35%>$500,000. Once the company makes a profit, they pay the tax. The taxed money is then distributed as dividends to the
As a small business owner, a c-corp, my corporate federal tax rate is 38% and my state tax rate is 10%. My personal tax rate is somewhere around 15%. If my personal tax rate is increased as Obama is promising, what incentive do I have to leave money in my company and invest in new equipment over paying myself more in salary this year considering that my personal taxes might double next year? I am absolutely going to take more in salary.
crazy,
for 8 years no one uttered a word about deficits and now you all want it paid off asap...........
Mark, you sit on cash rather than perform R&D, investing in marketing or in new capacity, like a facility or machines, or new hires. Though, you are certainly right, if orders are coming in for a product you are producing you will hire personnel to fill them. Also, why would a bank lend money to start a new business if they are highly unsure if they will get their money back?
Businesses expand when there is demand for additional goods and/or services. Demand growth occurs when consumers have increased confidence, which has declined every month since January.
First of all, where's your proof on the consumer confidence thing, and second of all, THANK YOU. Businesses do not expand when they get a 25% tax rate instead of a 28% rate. They hire when consumers buy their products, which stems partly due to confidence. In addition, the way to increase both consumer confidence and consumer demand is to create jobs, and the way to do that is simple: increase spending. Now I know that a lot of you are scared about the debt and deficit; even a progressive like me is a little nervous about this debt. But unless we take advantage of the low borrowing interest rates and go big on a plan to fix our nation, we'll never get out of this rut. We don't need to borrow all this money, of course; we could easily cover it with closing loopholes and raising taxes for the wealthiest Americans. But unless we start pumping more money into the economy via spending bills, our recovery will continue to be slow. All the tax cuts in the world wouldn't won't lift us out of this weak recovery; only a big spending plan, like the American Jobs Act that Obama proposed, will jump-start this economy.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
Freshieee: The proposed Obama Jobs Act does not create demand and suggests that state governments increase jobs that they cannot fund long term. Even liberal voters in San Diego and San Jose voted to curb public sector pensions. There is a growing disdain amongst voters to fund public sector pensions when the private sector is funding their own pensions. The trend is less municipal and state workers. You have mentioned this in several of your posts. Government payrolls have decreased under President Obama when they increased under Reagan, Bush Sr, GWB and Clinton. Most states have to balance their budgets. They don't have the luxury of running deficits.
Businesses expand when there is demand for their goods and/or services. When the consumer is reluctant and businesses are uncertain, it is the government's responsibility to create policies that create stability and promote growth. And, for Keynesian theorists, the government should provide direct stimulus to drive growth and demand. Right now, businesses are not sure how the ACA will affect their bottom line. Waiting 18 days for the US Supreme Court to rule, will remove some of the uncertainty.
The Obama Jobs Act proposes cutting payroll taxes for people earning under $50,000. Yet, the Bush tax cuts expire. So which is it? Tax cuts don't work or do work?
I do agree with your point that we have an opportunity to borrow money at historically low interest rates and we should take advantage of the problems in Europe. But, wrecklessly spending money without an immediate return through increased tax revenues and long term job growth will result in further credit down grades. The president wants to double down on "green" energy when a viable solution is decades away. Our country does not have decades. We have about a decade. I saw your proposed plan which had a couple of good points. Here is my idea for government spending: Transition from oil (gasoline/diesel) to natural gas (LNG/CNG). The conversion will create jobs for infrastructure, servicing etc. Tax credits for conversion kits for vehicles. My reasoning is this: All natural gas will come from US sources which keeps revenues in the US not overseas. Natural gas is cheaper than gasoline/diesel. That will keep more money in the pockets of consumers. Natural gas would eliminate the need to use corn as a bio fuel which would bring down related food costs (admittedly, not really significant); As you pointed out in one of your proposals, I would increase the tax on natural gas consumption to be used for infrastructure repairs on interstates and bridges and for R&D to create a viable energy alternative. Also, I would partner with private business to build 4 geographically strategic desalination plants to ensure that fresh, potable water is available regardless of weather patterns or events that may impact the environment. The government could lease land on some naval bases to facilitate this. Are we meeting half way?
You can blame financial guru's like Dave Ramsey to blame for this economic crisis, he's going around teaching millions of people to go "creditless" even credit cards, cash only, this extreme form of budgeting that basically would kill this economy, with a dagger in the heart. Talking about slowing an economy down to a dead halt. He's as leathal as anything Obama done or didn't do.
You are right Paul, those selfish people need to go around buying everything the need, might need, what they want, what they wanted at one time but don't want now, and even stuff that is just at a "good price" ...... all the way until their freaking credit cards are totally maxxed out ! Then, of course, when they lose their job while the wife has a baby on the way ...... hell, they can just file for bankruptcy !! They need to do this so Obama can look good and be re-elected !!! Isn't that what all this bull$hit is about ?
Yep, there we have it ! It's ALL DAVE RAMSEY'S fault !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I sure as hell hope you are not a financial planner or you would be getting SUED FOR MALPRACTICE !!!!
Consumer confidence data is publicly available all over the internet, Einstein. see below.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/29/us-usa-economy-confidence-view-idUSBRE84S0TH20120529
First of all, Reagan and Bush Sr. didn't have to deal with state balanced budget amendments, while Clinton and Bush Jr. didn't have to deal with a completely anti-spending Congress. I don't see the sense in balanced budget amendments, personally, because all they do is handcuff the legislature into balancing the budget even when doing so would make things worse, like during a recession. I'm personally against excessively generous pension benefits, not because of the comparisons to the private sector but because of fiscal matters. But the American Jobs Act would create new demand by creating between 1.3 million and 2 million new jobs, allowing them to spend money and create more jobs via the multiplier effect.
Yes, the government should attempt to create stability and promote growth, but sometimes policies that are good for the long-term ought to be pursued even if they rattle the markets in the short-term. And as for the Keynesian reference, that is exactly what the Jobs Act would do.
Well, personally I am not a fan of tax cuts as economic stimulus. But, in some cases, tax cuts can work, if they are targeted at the right people, aka the middle class. That is exactly where the payroll tax cut is targeted at. In addition, I don't think that lump-sum tax cuts at the end of the year are a good stimulus because they are large, and most people tend to stuff that into savings or pay down debt or mortgages with the cash. Yet a tax cut that adds a few extra dollars every payday can subconsciously induce people to spend that money, as it is only significant when added together with all the other paydays.
Well, I believe that Obama is trying to strengthen development of America's clean energy development so that, when the market takes off, America will have a considerable share of that industry. Not to mention that green energy could be used in a more centralized manner, via government-run solar plants or wind farms. As for spending, the credit agencies didn't downgrade us because of our recessionary deficit, as they know that it is natural for deficits to occur during recessions. They downgraded us because of our lack of getting a consensus on reducing our structural deficit, caused by the Bush tax cuts and other fiscal policies like growing entitlement costs. Had we adopted a balanced deficit agreement, like Obama's "grand bargain," we could have avoided the downgrade. Unfortunately, the anti-tax raising Tea Party caucus in the House refused to compromise, and so we got hit in the face with the downgrade.
Well, that is a pretty damn good plan. Developing natural gas, taxing it to rebuild our infrastructure, and transitioning from a largely oil and coal economy into a natural gas economy. The only problem is whether you are going to use fracking, because I believe that there are certain safety and environmental concerns about it's long-term effects. But, other than that, I am pretty sure that we are meeting half-way.
It's called a balanced approach to credit, Dave Ramsey teaching does not have balance, in addition a financial planner would not say to cut up all credit cards, a good financial planner would say use credit wisely, unless of course you have an addiction to credit, then you better go to a Dave Ramsey, other than that if America buys the Dave Ramsey teaching, the auto industry as well as every other industry goes into collapse.
I find it hard to believe what the self-proclaimed small business men are saying about the uncertainty about tax rates preventing them from hiring or developing new products. I think disingenuousness is at the core of their arguments.
First, people invest if they think they'll make money. Period. It doesn't matter if the tax rate is 15%, 25%, 39% or what. If you took the arguments of the disingenuous seriously, you would have to conclude that no business got done until Reagan and Bushie. It is simply an irrational argument. The problem is that after Reagan and Bush, less business got done and the economy became increasingly financialized, with activity becoming M&A, vulture capital, derivatives peddling, etc., and the financial sector (including the financial activity of what we think of as product producing corporations) became an ever larger part of GDP.
Second, the consumer driven nature of our economy has been completely unstable after Reagan started the war on wages, resulting in stagnant or declining income and rising inequality for the last 30 years. We have had an absolute dependence on bubbles to provide the income for consumption. What sustained this economy during the Bush insanity was fraud, pure and simple fraud. It was not lower taxes. It was not "certainty." In fact, there was no certainty at all, there was merely a stupid belief in the lies the fraudulent were peddling, from the mortgage salesmen who told people their houses would keep going up to they could cash out re-fi, or they could get an interest-only adjustable rate mortgage starting at 3%, to the wall st. derivatives peddlers who told investors that these (actual) b rated securities were Triple A. And besides they were protected by CDSs - sold by companies who could not possibly pay if required.
Without the housing bubble to provide cash to consumers, Bush's "jobless recovery" (remember that?) would have been jobless during his entire insane presidency.
This is getting too long. I would simply reiterate: if somebody can make a million dollars on an investment, 4 or 5 points more in taxes simply doesn't matter. And the same is true of making 10,000 on an investment.
@Jim D: You are correct, it is disingenuous for someone to say that they are not developing new products or services because of the uncertainty of Obamacare or because of the fast approaching "fiscal cliff". You are correct, the rich will always find a way to invest their money...and...if they had no other choice they would pay 4 or 5 more points in taxes..."if" they had to. But, the fact is, they don't have to pay 4 or 5 points. With the global economy, investments can be made across the globe and accountants can legally avoid paying any US taxes on some investments. Pointing to tax policies of the past simply cannot be duplicated because of the global economy and the ability to access markets and profit from it. In fact, for the same reasons that our country boomed during the industrial revolution, the larger populated and developing countries of China and India provide many investment opportunities for rich individuals and US Corporations. All corporations exist to make a profit and benefit the shareholders. All steps will be taken within the structures of the law to increase profit and benefits to the shareholders. If that means setting up foreign entities to avoid higher tax rates, the corporation is obligated to do that on behalf of the shareholders. Once everyone accepts that we are part of a global economy and we are competing with other nations, the faster we can adopt policies that will bring businesses to the US.
He had the House and the Senate his first two years. On the stimulus? Those construction projects in the 2009 stimulus bill that were supposed to get moving right away, but jobs council members told Obama that some got held up because of elaborate government regulations and permitting procedures."Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected," Obama joked.
Mark, the stimulus created 2m jobs. That's a whole lot better than the republican agenda of do-nothing.
Mark Thomas
How long did those 2m jobs last? They are gone too...waste of taxpayers money!
Watt, I don't know how long those jobs lasted, but the question is still should we have done nothing or if we should have done something, what do you think (or what does the GOP think) should have been done?
I've yet to see an intelligent response form the right on that question.
Mark, there are many jobs related bills coming out of the House. Reid will not even let them come up for a vote. Why? Some of them have to be workable. In any case, I think up or down votes are needed.
Mark Thomas-371822,
Just look to Wisconsin for what the GOP thinks. Seems to have worked pretty well for Wisconsin, even though the Democrats/Union members seem to think otherwise.
There are many proposals that have been proposed by the US House and Senate Republicans. Unfortunately, the President and Senate Democrats just ignore them out of hand and say they have no ideas or are unwilling to compromise.
One simple example proposed in the House is to reduce the corporate tax rate at the same time simplifying the tax code by removing many of the loopholes. This idea isn't even considered an idea by Democrats because it is opposite to their tax reduction scheme of adding more loopholes for special interests that sound good but are so cumbersome to use that very few corporation can qualify or they simply find the red tape to cumbersome to complete.
Another example is the money sent back to states to support things like teachers pay. This was like sending more money to a crack addict. In Illinois, they just used this income to help demonstrate that there isn't an issue with state workers pension and kept on state workers that we can't afford. The problem is that when the money ran out, the state was worse off than before because they just put off their core problem of over commitment and still had to fire workers a few months later...
arm, I'm not saying that government spending should not be reduced over the long term, only that in the short term during a recovery from the worst economic times in almost a century, it's a recipe for disaster. What both parties can't figure out is the long-tem plan.
I'm also saying that Mobil Oil doesn't detrmine how much oil they pump based on whether the tax rate is 10% or 15%.
Here are the results of the federal stimulus over the last few years:
GDP – US$
2007: 14,028.7 B
2008: 14,369.1 B
2009: 13,939.0 B
2010: 14,526.5 B
2011: 15,094.0 B
2012: 15,601.5 B (US budget)
Annual federal deficit in US$:
2008: 458.55 B
2009: 1,412.69 B
2010: 1,293.49 B
2011: 1,299.59 B
2012: 1,326.95 B (US budget)
%GDP Increase (annual):
2008: +2.43%
2009: -2.99%
2010: +4.21%
2011: +3.91%
2012: +3.36%
%GDP Stimulus (annual; federal deficit $/avg. GDP):
2008: +3.23%
2009: +9.98%
2010: +9.09%
2011: +8.77%
2012: +8.65%
%GDP Net ‘Growth’ (%GDP increase - %GDP Stimulus):
2008: -0.80%
2009: -12.97%
2010: -4.88%
2011: -4.86%
2012: -5.29%
The above Net GDP ‘Growth’ assumes zero growth from the private sector. Our stimulus ‘investment’
has earned us a negative return.
Jay please compare with the years 1930, 31, 32, 33, 34, showing also the transfer of wealth downward during the Great Depression, with the 2008, 09, 10, 11, 12, showing the transfer of wealth upward.
The depression was ended by public spending, and private corporate spending not so much.
The recession was not ended by public spending, and private corporate spending less so.
Beyond the economy growing/contracting the flow of money toward investment or away from investment is controlled by risk.
The current investment outlook is strongly against risk; hence neither government investment nor private corporate investment is interested in spending on investment.
The concentrated corporate and private wealth wipeout in the depression was only replaced by delayed government intervention, but this recession is not marked by huge losses in corporate and private capital concentration or large scale government intervention.
Again the depression held no horde of cash, but this recession has held much cash.
The implication here is that cash is being horded, private spending is not for investment, but merely for maintenance spent to hold ground, and is being taken from savings, retirement plans and consumer cash holdings.
The major current profitability for corporations is fed from other people's maintenance spending, but as those cash holding accumulates and as risk aversion carries the day, and investments are not taken.
This cash rich risk aversion is analogous to any person's personal financial plan that says, hold fast, spend little, and do nothing, things might change and wait.
At some point as current recession lengthens, consumer cash will run out, government cash runs out, and major corporations and wealthy still risk averse will cut expenses and horde cash all the more.
We are using the luxury of government bailout and insured bank accounts to prolog this recession, by delaying action we invite unwelcomed risk.
Not acting to prevent further collapse, not taking pre-emptive measures to head off disaster, not planning for alternatives, delaying economic driven transitions and allowing multiple problems to accumulate we are temping unpredictable revolution.
At worst we (the wealthy) will have a horde of cash and property and mineral rights to the entire nation, with the major population groups (100 million+), with neither jobs, or pensions, or charity, or mercy, or transportation.
The problem, is the problem; "we don't have any path to economic growth", and we are endangering the tools to get out of a bigger and much longer recession.
Here's what won't work:
Anything suggested by the incipient and nonsense comments in Newsvine, the topic Economy vanishes in insults, propaganda and side issues and wastes time effectively derailing the topic.
The depression was NOT ended by public spending. The effect of the war was near 100% employment and a fundamental shift from making things for comsumption to making things to destroy property and kill people; however you mustn't confuse this with the end of the depression. Once the war was over and the soldiers came home, our jobless rate skyrocketed again and the economy tanked. By enacting pro-growth tax policies, the government incentivized the private sector to rebuild the US economy as well as the economies of Europe.
True, bud coming out of a recession-depression will take more than 31/2 years to recover, since it started in 2007, it will be around 2014 before noticeable unemployment number improve, unfortunately. Put Mickey Mouse in the oval office and the same thing happens.
armurray, you assertions about loopholes don't cut it. You need specifics or you have no argument. Any republican can say lower rates, close loopholes, but end up with a bill that closes the loopholes for pet groomers, and leaves them for everybody else - everybody else, that is, who makes substantial contributions to either the republicans or to the neo-fascist pacs.
Lowering tax corporate rates a couple points while substantially closing loopholes would be beneficial; lowering rates to something like Ireland's would leave us like Ireland: broke. And there is very little in the history of the republicans, a party that provides 15% tax rates for hedge fund managers, to suggest that any significant loopholes will be closed. (And no, we're not broke now. The money has been transferred to the wrong hands.)
@ the OP - if you think Obama "had" the senate for the first two years, you did not pay attention. If you are a tea bugger or just familiar with that creature, you are familial with the notion of RINOs. Though I hate to admit it, there are also such things as DINOs. But, again, sorry, you didn't notice, you were watching The Jersey Sore.
God forbid anything gets done that might help either party's election prospects. Let's not worry about the people, or America, let's just worry about that election in November. After all, America doesn't matter any longer. Just politics.
Well, tax cuts to the rich matter. Other than that, not so much.
Wow, government "solutions" to the recession have just prolonged and deepened it, as well as running up unsustainable debt, arbitrarily enriching some and bankrupting others. Who could have guessed unless they had actually read a book or 2 about the Great Depression? Our current Federal Reserve Chairman shoud be embarrassed. At least the President can assert the defense of ignorance. Might it just be time to STOP and let the economy actually heal itself without government picking winners and losers?
It didn't prolong anything, your a Recovering Democrat, to what?????? Republicanism??? The group that authored two unfunded wars???? We are in a recession/ a depression in several areas of the country, it started in 2007 with Hoover, I mean Bush in office, and hopefully will show energy by 2014. Bring back Ronald Reagan and the same results will occur.
This is obvious as the nose on your face. Obama is a desperate man and will do or say anything to get re-elected. The next step in his campaign will be for Obama to be re-invented as the staunch fiscal conservative with hard boiled executive abilities reconstructing the social contract to ensure a brighter future which of course is laughable.
Yup and more ultra left liberals will abandon him.
no liberal will ever abandon BHO. lib/progressives support experimental social change thru political means and the election of 2008 was experimental social change. to abandon BHO now would be tantamount to admitting the experiment was a failure. we are stuck with the hope we can make the change ourselves, by voting Obama OUT
How many Dems do you see begging Obama to come and campaign for them? How many Dems do you see asking Obama to come and help them raise funds for their campaigns?
Most Dems are running the other direction as fast as they can move to get as much distance between them and Obama as they possibly can so that they don't go down with him in November. A "good" politician is smart enough to see which side has the election butter on it, and the Obama side is absolutely buck-naked in those terms (the flip side is that Republicans aren't begging Romney to help them, either).
If I was a Democrat (and I thank God daily that I am not), I would not ask BHO to help me tie my shoes because he is a proven loser, an amateur, an academician as opposed to a doer, and a total bomb in a job that requires the best we can put up there. He has insulted everyone who has tried to help him, including most of his main advisors, insulted our "allies" around the world, and insulted the intelligence of any voter who can think beyond clicking the party box on their ballot. His list of sins against the American public is endless and others have done a much better job of listing them than I can, so I won't repeat the whole list.
Let's use a little good old common sense like the voters in Wisconsin used and get the tax-and-spender-in-chief out of the White House and back into the classroom where he belongs.
I am absolutely astounded that anyone legitimately thinks a change of the guard in the White House will magically solve anything, or that keeping Obama will do the same. Anyone with common sense should be taking a good, hard look at your state's Senators and Representatives and what they are or are not doing, regardless of whether or not the letter after their name on the TV matches your political affiliation. I voted for Duncan Hunter (R) years ago because even though I didn't agree with all of his views, the man got things done. I am NOT voting for his son, Duncan D. Hunter (R), because Mr. Hunter the younger hasn't done anything of substance in office except talk and engage in ideological obstructionism.
The people of Nevada need to bite the bullet and vote out Harry Reid for similar reasons. Same for you Kentuckians with Mitch McConnell. These big-mouthed, do-nothing ideologues need to go.
I don't like everything Obama has done or is doing, but at least he's trying to do things. If Romney wants my vote he's gonna have to do something more than talk big and then make himself unavailable for comment after the fact, because so far that's all I'm seeing out of the man.
The WPA & CCC did not do anything to ease the high unemployment rates.
Furthermore those programs cost the tax payers money.
Next they were deemed unconstitutional, in fact almost all of FDR's new deal was struck down by the SCOUS.
The jobs have to come from the private sector.
That will only happen when the regulations in place today are repealed, and get a person in the white house that is business friendly and not a tax hog..
With all the uncertainty over the tax rates, health care, ect, companies are not going to reinvest their profits to expand and grow and and workers..
stupid, most peopl eunderstand that the government has few levers to prod the economy in the short-run. Spending money on infrastructure (which most people believe is badly under-funder to begin with) is one of the best ways to productively put money into the economy.
Put another way, what's the alternative? Do nothing at all and hope for the best?
Or if it wasn't "your" party who did it, hope for the worst? Because then "their" party would lose in November.
I agree with you, Annie. If they worked together instead of always fighting no matter the issue, we might see improvement.
Mark,
I agree with you on infrastructure spending. The challenge today is that there are so many regulations stopping the actual infrastructure problems and manufacturing that they take many years to even start. That is why the Bay Bridge rebuild is being manufactured in China - because they don't have the regulatory hurdles to jump over that their US competitors have.
If we need bridges built and infrastructure revitalized, why not just bring back the low cost solution - the chain gang?
Hard labor Shawshank-Style.
The chain gang has been declared unconstitutional and a violation of a prisoner's right to sit on his backside in a cell and make up appeals to his imprisonment. Google "frivolous case filings" to see how much garbage they have clogged the judicial system with in the last 10 years.
Please note that I agree with you. Prisoners should be forced to work to help expiate their crimes and help pay for their incarceration that is another thing that is taking state spending down the toilet.
Great idea to make them work...one problem....the damn ACLU.
"I hope Republicans care more about their country than they do about winning the next election," said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.
Well one can always hope, but I wouldn't bet on it...
Hey James, take a look at the recent national security leaks designed to make the president look tough on defense, and tell us who cares more about their country than winning the next election.
Sherrod Brown is part of the problem. He is one of the biggest clowns in the Senate. He has a 5 point lead as an encumbent in a state with a better than average economy. Obama has very short coattails. You might be going down Sherrod "Clown" Brown.
We do care that is why we want Obama and Reid out of there. Reid and Pelosi, have had enough time to screw up the country, and Obama's I Hope to Change it for the worst, has not helped any. He took a bad situation and made it far worse. Real unemployment has nearly doubled (I count workers that just plain quit looking in this) Reid, and Pelosi's hand in the housing crash (bills forcing bad credit scores to purchase homes) and the housing bubble. His Obama care and Dodd/Frank that is causing small doctors, and banks out of business.
Mark Thomas - "Been Blocked by Republicans". Come on man come up with an original thought please! Since 1933 the Democrats have controlled both chambers of Congress 56 years to Republicans 14. That should tell you something about our long term problems as well as everything being the Republicans fault.
And remember recently Democrats controlled both house 4 out of the last 5 years. Democrats controlled it all White House, House, & Senate. So please get off the talking points, look at the history, and then make an argument with some merit.
you come with an original thought. We've seem your comment plenty of times, however yours are not entirely true...........
How about an 8% overall approval rating. does that "Merit" anything other than COMPLETE removal from office?
Please state what is not fact Mr. Shill & Mr Griffen I would assume you realize that the 8% approval applies to Democrats and Republicans? I agree and get them all out if that is the case but most posts on here are pure BS and try to explain that one party is better then the other which is just a joke. I am pointing out that if someone is in charge 56 years to the others 14 years it seems to me that the 56 year finger should stop pointing and actually contribute to the problem solving. Get it Mr. Shill???
The jobs created and saved by the economic stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed on Feb. 17, 2009 cost at a minimum an average of $228,055 each, according to data released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
Harry Reid is more interested in crony politics than helping this country or the people. Its pretty da.mn obvious to the public that we should be doing/trying something different than what was done in 09 & 10......
Are you referring to energy bills for domestic exploration sponsored by Rep. Paul Ryan whose family owns mineral rights around the country, your talking about those jobs bills that would make the Ryan family filthy rich???????????? Those job "enhancers"? Hey pal this crap is on both side of the isle, not just the Democrats.
Clearly, Obama has failed. No puttin lipstick on that pig. I mean really, a community organizer is ill suited for solving this nations problems. He has no head for business and has no clue how to fix the economy accept to throw money at his top donors. Enough! One and done.
1. BOTH parties are to blame for the mess we are in (put party over country).
2. When the government tries to resolve the problems they just get worse.
3. Printing more money is NOT the answer.
4. Financial cycles like social cycles are cyclic.
5. When the government increases regulations the economy suffers.
6. Always remember the alternative to capitalism is socialism (a failed system).
We aren't capitalist either.
Never said WE were!
And Capitalism has a sterling success record?? How about American Greed on MSNBC, that's right FOX news cult members can't watch that station or they'll be punished.
January 11, 1996, Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. In 2008, candidate Obama deceived the American public about his potentially damaging tie to this third party. Evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office. You won't see this on MSNBC.
Your post is so ridiculous and crafted to extract BS out of thin air.
The GOP has a mandate, since the very first day Obama took office. One term Obama, and the hell with jobs and the economy. They have reinforced that mandate at least a hundred times since then, Always fighting new jobs, infrastruture maintenance, and degrdaing school systems nationwide. So, they ruined the economy, so “Reelect the GOP ?” What a blatant sucker, for negative entertainment you and your supporter are.
How wonderful it will be when voters, start voting For America, not harsh entertainment.
I agree, Republican congress and Senate have done a poor job of working with him therefore an 8% approval
There have been a load of options along the way. First and foremost, the Republicans could have put getting the economy back in order way in front of "Our goal is to make Obama a one-term president."
There are still options on the table but if - God forbid - there is any progress, President Obama might be re-elected.
There are always options, but it seems that bipartisan bickering, finger pointing and "oh my God, we have a black president that was born in the USA, but let's try to convince everyone he wasn't" has been more important than the people our elected officials are supposed to serve.
Personally, I think every voter should look at what their representatives have said in the way of derogatory comments towards the President, and if they put party before people, birther before bipartisanship, or voted 'no' based on the fact that a bill came from the other side of the aisle, they should be voted out of office.
If our elected lawmakers can't work together because of their political affiliation, then we, the people, should show them how to do it by coming together to protest the real problem - their inability to work together for the betterment of the USA and its citizens.
Replies are welcome, but don't be Republican or Democrat when you respond. Just be American.
The only way our economic problems are going to get fixed is through partisan compromise, but as long as we have politicians signing 'pledges' not to do certain things, compromise is seemingly impossible.
Dachs, THIRTY bills in the Senate, passed by the House this year, and what has the Senate done with them?
Have the done any negotiation? Formed groups with the House to hash out the differences and come to an agreement? Discussed them in Committee? Talked about them on the floor of the Senate? Actually held a vote on them?
Nope. EVERY single one of them has been tabled by Harry Reid. I'm not a Republican/Democrat. I'm an American that is sick of the Senate Majority Leader calling the others "the party of no" and then doing nothing. I'm sick of the finger pointing as the Senate sits on a "Quorom Call" 75% of the time. I'm sick of the corruption, bribes, payoffs, and vote buying.
The Senate has not done ONE single thing this year except raise the debt limit and extend "payroll" taxes this year. And the ONLY thing they want right now is to raise the debt limit again. The Senate hasn't even put forth a budget for this nation in THREE YEARS!
This isn't about being a Democrat/Republican. This is about one man, Harry Reid, protecting the re-election campaign of the current President.
Cheryl, and the flip side of that coin is Mitch McConnell saying the number one goal was to make the newly elected President a one term president. Not about being a Democrat or Republican? Get real.
Double post. Bubblegum error.
Annie, please, please, please show me ONE, just ONE, instance where the political party NOT in power wanted to retain the incumbents. This fixation on the GOP wanting PresiDEBT Obama to be a one-termer is the way ALL politics happen.
Mike - Yes, it has always been about that. But the division in Congress (and in America, if these vines are any indication) has never been so blatant, so in your face and with so little EFFORT made to be bi-partisan. I don't think trying to be bi-partisan has always worked, but at least there SEEMED to be some effort made. None today. Nope. Just about "my party" and whatever political hat we chose to put on this morning.
That's my only point, Mike. We aren't Americans any more. We're just democrats and republicans, conservatives and liberals. That's my only point - just seems wrong to me, that's all.
Not a D or an R, not a C or an L. Just an American.
And Mike, just so we're clear, I tar both political parties with the same brush.
"There are no Red States, there are no Blue States, there are only 'The United States' " -Barack Hussein Obama
Partisan politics works both ways...get off the high horse both sides will not compromise. Obama will not compromise his ideals of a socialistic government where all are dependent on it. Both sides are guilty of ruining the country, it won't stop until someone comes along that can unite the parties on some common ground...who the hell knows what that is...but we can hope.
And herein lies the problem in a nutshell "I hope Republicans care more about their country than they do about winning the next election," said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio."
This is the same "hope" that accompanied the word "change" in Obama's election rhetoric. What Sherrod and other like-minded Democrats haven't the intellect (or political will) to grasp is that unless Republicans win the next election, they can not save the country from its headlong rush to unfunded socialism.
We, the People, have seen what happens when all you do is hope for change. Now it's time to see what change happens when you actually get out and work for it.
Throw Obama and his Socialcrats out of office while there's still time.
Option one: repeat the successful actions of governors in states that cut spending, reduced taxes. simplified and clarified (not eliminated) government regulation of the private sector and saw improvements in their states' bottom lines, economies and unemployment numbers, and, while you're at it, realize what the voters in San Diego and San Jose, cities in the most liberal of states, did when they overwhelmingly voted to curtail public pension that had clearly become excessive and at amounts taxpayers in those cities were no longer willing to fund.
In other words, governments are no different than individuals and businesses, all must live within their means and stick to a budget in which expenditures do not exceed revenues. Unfortunately for the country, and you too, the probability of your taking these actions is remote at best.
I guess this means that Obama is running of of people and events to blame for his failures.
No.. he just launched another "green energy" project to manufacture more of the "its Bush"s fault" keys for the leftist keyboards.
No, it just means that the government has few levers to drive a free-market economy, which most of us understand to be entirely true.
It's still justified to blame poor domestic policy of 8 years, almost a decade, and a looming recession/depression on the previous administration which will begin to recover around 2014. That's a Republican previous administration I might add.
When he is in office as long as GW Hoover, I mean Bush then you can blame Obama, until then the previous administration doo-doo lefts its marks on theis recession/depression
It's very easy to blame a Bush Presidency that lasted almost a decade for this economic collapse that started in 2007, and it will take more than 31/2 years to bring it back, in addition to millions of jobs that have left our shores since the 80's, turning the middle class into the lower middle class.
I have yet to hear from the Republicans exactly what they would do to put people back to work, other then the Bush economic plan on steroids, more tax cuts for the wealthy, we've done that since Regan, trickle down doesn't work, the only thing that trickles is Pee and we the American people have been peed on plenty. The GOP congress in 2010 ran on Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, well where are they. Because the only thing John and the gang have done is stall, obstruct and stand around with their fingers in their ears telling everyone that the Presidents Jobs plan doesn't work. Except the jobs plan has been sitting in congress since September and never been voted on, so the jobs claims drop this week and yet we hear nary a word fromt he MSM or the GOP on those numbers they only seem excited to report on increases!!!
Newsflash sfilutze, Republicans control ONLY the House....can't do anything without the Senate and the WH (you know, that peskly little thing in the Constitution about checks and balances). The House has passed SEVERAL job creation bills that are now sitting on Harry Reid's desk over there in the Senate...they're not getting voted on, they're not getting debated....so, actually, it's the Senate Dems who are stalling, obstructing, and standing around with their fingers in their ears telling everyone that the House is doing nothing. How about putting some of those bills up to a vote or debating them?
They have no answers, because until average American Joe Schmuck starts purchasing various widgets, the economy is stale, tax breaks won't do it, austerity measures won't do it. Going around saying you were in business not your typical widget making business, but a slightly cut throat business WILL not sell widgets. They have no answers to the residential real estate problem around the country, WHICH IS, people are NOT buying. REPUBLICANISM doesn't prompt buying in more than DEMOCRATS. I'm purchasing if not as much probably more 31/2 years ago. OBAMA has not stopped me from purchasing!!
Absolutely agreed, the myth of American politics, tax cuts stimulate anything. We had 10 years of tax cuts, how did we get into a recession/depression????
Want zero (or close) unemployment? Link Corporate subsidies and taxcuts to new
hires lasting 1 year minimum.
Want to stimulate the economy? Give the Bush taxcuts to the poor,,,,,,$500 billion
immediately spent and put back into the economy instead into foreign (untaxable)
bank accounts.
Want to fix the deficit? Cut the maximum Federal Aid to States to 100% of what they
contribute in Federal taxes (Texas all by itself collects more than every individual on
welfare and foodstamps combined, With Arizona close behind)
How do they figure we are running low on options??
Bo, last year they handed out $1500 stimulus money to people in Down town Detroit. The majority of the people thought that the money came right out of Mr. Obama pocket.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qG_dqC6vBc
Some intelligent articulation by two interviewees, obviously there together:
When Regalsky asked another woman where she thought the money was coming from she replied:
Good point, never brought up by FOX news, they never get around to those small facts.
Tax cuts do not create jobs, they create debt.
when the socialist is out of the WH... the corp will start to put some of the 4 trillion in capital on the sidelines to work.
only after the election though... they can't risk four more years of this comme
Tell that to JFK!!!!
Thermen, only if you keep spending.
Regardless, by your logic we need to have the obama (bush) tax cuts expire across the board and the payroll taxcuts end as well. Then the government can keep on spending. I have no problem with letting these tax cuts expire, but government needs to change their spending habits.
The idea is to cut spending and taxes at the same time. If you can do only one, cut spending, it will lessen the debt. Business will spend when their future expenses are known. This changing tax laws are bad for business, especially small businesses that can not afford tax lawyers. Make the Bush tax cuts more perminate, or at least 10 years, then business can plan. Second money must be put into the system so that products will sell, and companies can start to hire. The easiest way is to cut taxes, then the public can choose how to spend their money. When govenment spends money they choose what they will buy (Solyndra) which is not good for business because government skews what normally would have been sold and business can not plan on that for the future. If the public could spend 1/10th the money the government spends millions of jobs would be created. Even JFK a democrat knew if you cut taxes you get job growth, but for it to work Government must cut spending to prevent the debt from raising. Bush ("read my lips, no new taxes) cut taxes, but congress didn't cut spending so the Debt went up. Now Obama want to raise taxes on the so called rich (ever notice how what is rich keeps comming down?) like the Atenitive tax which was susposed to only effect the rich now effects all middle and even some low income households. The so called Rich Tax (over a million, went to 500K, then to 250K now 200K, next month probably 100K. The only other mistake Government could do is to raise the min wage. But that causes inflation so in the end even with the increase to fewer workers, companies will either have to lay off some or raise prices to cover the additional costs, so there went any increase in pay, but of course the government loves it, because the higher wages generate more tax money for them.
We had 10 years of Bush tax cuts, how did we get into this recession/depression with the tax cut logic???
Obama's to do list:
Pack.
Work on short game.
Continue to blame Bush for my shortcoming... the lefttards love it.
But Bush didn't leave him a small recession, Bush left him a deep recession, and in many areas of the country a depression, starting in 2007, and probably were looking at 2014 when the U.S crawls out, and that is if Europe does not collapse.
How about bringing back the Glass-Steagall Act for starters?
Obama had that opportunity and decided against.
now... GS is twice as big and powerful as they were before the debacle
Anyone see the congressional hearing on " green jobs " held yesterday ?
The administration touts how many green jobs have been created.
It was laughable what the administration's representative said what were green jobs.
A student working in a used record shop.
A garbage truck driver.
A driver of a natural gas powered bus.
And on.
It is worth a look.
Coverage of that hearing will not be seen hear.
You'll love this
The Obama administration's DEFINITION OF GREEN JOBS!!
These people - all of them in the Obama administration are absolutely CLUELESS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVhKulJRZZw
A rigged congressional hearing is in preparation for an election campaign, it is not because congress is listening, it is because they have already made up their minds to not act. The campaign is framed as far as green jobs so something like this: "Green jobs are made by cutting trees down, not by planting them." When all is said and done down the road a few years the green jobs will still be there manned by millions of unemployed planting trees, millions who never understood that people are more important than money, and their undying faith that big business has always been based on natural grown and organic free-markets.
Julie I read an article about jobs considered Green jobs. Essentially any thing that casuse you to have to look at anything classified as "green" puts you in the green job category. So since I walk by a Chevy Volt everyday I can classify my job as "Green"
Social mood directs the markets, economy, politics, culture. A president who takes office during improving social mood witnesses a rising stock market and a better economy. Then he is credited for doing a good job. He is likely to get a second term. A president who is in office during a bear market bears the burden of negative social mood. He looses office after first term. Here is how social mood writes the history:
www.tradingstocks.net/html/socionomics.html
We are riding a wave of decline in social mood that resulted in a bear market. Bear markets have a way of tarnishing the image of those at the helm. Had Obama been the president during a bull market, he would have been hailed as the great savior. Today's problems are not because of what we are doing today, but they are because of what we did for the last 50 years. Folks, there is not much Obama, Bernanke or anybody can do about it. Government does not have a magic stick to swing and change the world. We have borrowed for 50 years and spent and inflated prices and salaries along with it. When the pay back time arrives, it is not reasonable to expect that all will be fine. An entire generation borrowed from the future. We are doing the same. When the future arrives, we will pay it back. There is no way out of it. This is a mathematical reality. This is the Failure of fractional reserve banking and interest based monetary system.
Several factors effect the markets.
Congressional changes and policys take about 2 years to effect the economy.
Democrat and Republican laws tend to favor the bigger companies and hurt the smaller ones.
Each additional bill makes it worse for the public, because any restrictions placed on Companies are passed down to the comsumer, one way or another. (loss of services, or more fees).
When the US went off the gold and silver standards, Debt is allowed to increase, because it is no longer restricted.
The President sets the tone, Congress sets the spending. An upbeat/positive president can set the tone for the country, FDR, Kennedy, Regan, all set positive tones, but even they could not change market conditions. note FDR did not change market conditions until WWII. Kennedy, and Regan did it with tax cuts.
The congress sets the budget, and the rules that business conduct themselves. Lower taxes, less regulations allow business to experiment and expand. Increasing taxes and regulations causes business to go overseas, or tighten their belts and wait to see what the future may hold.
Raising taxes lessens total tax income for the Government, people and business start to look for loopholes and ways of hiding money the more taxes go up. Making taxes simpler increases tax income for governments.
Govenment should make it easy to create new businesses, Countries like China, and Signapore,a person can start a business in less then 4 hours. in the US for example it takes more then 90 days just to do the paperwork, more to get the permits.