Obama's Jobs Bill would be GOOD for the Economy - Which is Why the GOP Objects to it

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by NoPartyAffiliation, Sep 18, 2011.

  1. NoPartyAffiliation

    NoPartyAffiliation New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The GOP has stated they can find "some commone ground" on this thing. Interesting. I see a LOT that's good about it. I number them so ConservaRepubs can tell me specifally why lowering taxes is no longer a good thing or whatever.

    1. Cut payroll tax in half on 1st $5M in wages. This is great. Big Corps who ship their jobs and tax renenues overseas won't even notice it. Who will? American small businesses like mine. Which of course is why the GOP is already fighting this clause. WTF?
    2. Cut payroll tax completely on new hires & raises, up to the first $50M. This is good too! This could help the economy! Which again, is why I'm sure it will be attacked by those who normally fight for tax cuts and say they are the answer to everything.
    3. Cut the payroll tax for workers in half. That's an extra $1500 during the holiday retail season. The GOP is already opposed to this too. Figures. Helps the middle class.
    4. 100% write-offs for new locations and equipment. This eliminates depreciating stuff over years so basically, you get like, 5 times the normal deduction. In other words, if I hire a new recruiter for my firm, I can write off the new computer I buy for them. If I open a new office, same thing on a bigger scale. I really don't see how anyone could argue against this but I'm sure I know who will...
    5. This thing is sort of theoretical hype and until I see something written firmly, I consider it fluff. Major companies - including foreign ones, have a tremendous advantage over American small business, when it comes to the billions paid out by the US Govt. Big Biz can afford to wait the stupid amount of time the government takes to pay for services rendered. So Obama's talking about cutting that to 90 days - which would give 100% American companies a chance at billions we pay to foreign or not-totally US companies. How's he going to do it? Um yeah. Good luck with that. I'm doubtful. But if he could, what would be the problem with it?
    6. Rebuilding bridges etc... that need it. That's what he said he was going to do with the money the first time. Not what happened. 4sshole! But let's say that's what the money goes to this time. Would it be better to have people on unemployment, draining funds for doing nothing or pay them for something useful?
    7. One thing I like is that he's talking about helping people who have been out of work, start their own business. I used to volunteer in Texas, teaching people how to do exactly that. They were often surprised how easy it could be. The key was always capitalization. If someone could keep their unemployment while starting a new business, this would solve that problem. If only one out of hundred were successful, that would be huge.

    So those are the main points. Of course, the same GOP that has complained that "tax cuts would be the answer to all of our problems", are opposed to virtually every point in this - including the tax cuts. Hypocrites.

    Of course, I have to admit I believe that if Perry were president and proposed this exact same thing, I'm sure the Dems would be opposed to it. Hypothetical Hypocrites! But for now, it's the GOP that are the actual hypocrites.
     
    Johnny-C and (deleted member) like this.
  2. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    You are correct!
     
  3. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yep. Just like the Jobs bill of 2009 was GOOD for the economy and the Jobs Bill of 2010 was GOOD for the economy. The jobs bill of 2011 will somehow be different.

    Because this time it's not Stimulus 2.0 nor is it the Jobs Bill of 2011. It's the American Jobs Act...Horray >_>

    Just produce the same thing with the same plans and call it something different. That always works.
     
  4. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    What would you propose, to refute that which the Obama Administration has presented?
     
  5. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Simple, lower labor cost. Businesses aren't higher because the cost of hiring workers are much too high. But that makes too much sense for our elected officials to want to pursue.

    In any case I really don't care if this bill passes or not. If it passes and it doesn't work (which I know it won't) Obama will have someone to blame. If it doesn't passes, he'll have someone to blame. Money not wasted by the government today will simply be wasted by the government tomorrow. So let's just get this over with.
     
  6. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So I guess you would propose the following:

    1. Lowering or eliminating the minimum wage
    2. Decrease working condition standards
    3. Eliminate the payroll tax
    4. Eliminate standards for worker's benefits
    5. Eliminate the ability of unions to effectively collectively bargain
    6. Eliminate the ability of workers to efficiently unionize
     
    Johnny-C and (deleted member) like this.
  7. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    How can we compete with countries that pay darned-near slave wages?
     
  8. NoPartyAffiliation

    NoPartyAffiliation New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    0

    So what in the first 5 points were in any of the previous bills? You don't know? Of course not sweetie. Hmmm. So you criticize but do not address a single specific point. Straight outta the Michele Whackmann playbook! Tea party right? :coffeecup:
     
  9. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    ___Exactly.___
     
  10. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yessir....
     
  11. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The American Jobs act is merely a collection of all the ideas from Stimulus, Jobs Bill 1 & 2. With some small things put in. So yes I do know what the points were for the last bills.

    They haven't worked then, but they'll work the next time because third time is always the charm right?
     
  12. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why don't we just follow China's example and eliminate all he modern-day benefits that American workers have.
     
  13. NoPartyAffiliation

    NoPartyAffiliation New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey baby, them "businesses aren't higher"? LOL
    And "if it doesn't passes""
    Well don't dat just be da tang! :-D
     
  14. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah! LOL!! That would do it! :)
     
  15. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If it means greater competitive advantage in the global war for jobs, then why not?

    better to have a job with no benefits, than no job and no benefits.

    I don't think people understand that in a globalized marketplace, you have to take whatever you can get, because there are 6 billion other people out there on the planet who will kill you to take what you see as 'slavery'. We have to stop comparing our worker's quality of lives with what we had in the past, and start comparing our worker's quality of lives to 3rd world conditions because that is who we are competing with and you can't stop that with Government or Taxation.

    Stop seeing the jobs market from an "American" or "Western" point of view and see the jobs market as global and you will see that the labor pool then expands to the point that people in the world will kill for 10,000 a year salary that you turn your nose up at.
     
  16. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    China is actually has a good enough through production. We are trying to obtain a great economy through consumption. We're not even close to following their example.

    Simple question:

    If I offered you a job at $4 dollars an hour with no lunch break would you take it?

    Also if you had a child and they took away child labor laws would you immediately take your child out of school and send him to work?
     
  17. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Would you like to work in China as a laborer? (How about your children, if you have any?)
     
  18. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great, I can feel better knowing you actually have intellectual capacity beyond baseless attacks. I feel much better.
     
  19. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Simple question:

    If I offered you a job at $4 dollars an hour with no lunch break would you take it?

    Also if you had a child and they took away child labor laws would you immediately take your child out of school and send him to work?
     
  20. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would take either option. Essentially, what you are proposing is choosing the lesser of two economic evils. I would rather choose a more pragmatic approach to encourage economic growth that is based upon intelligent positive economic analysis, not a simple-minded normative approach.
     
  21. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, because there is no such thing as economic "good" or economic "evil" there is just 'economics'. You cannot put morals into economics!

    "It's business, never personal"
     
  22. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In this case, normative economic statements are justified.
     
  23. NoPartyAffiliation

    NoPartyAffiliation New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,772
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ah, the "knowledge" of the Tea Party is always so entertaining!
    So there was a payroll tax cut for employers in the 2009 ARR? For employees? 100% expensing for opening new locations, equipement etc? Funny, I didn't see any of those things.

    So you would lower the cost of workers? To what? Dollar a day maybe? The United States of India is your dream for America.
    I am so grateful for you! I was beginning to take the Tea Party seriously!
     
  24. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nope it's a simple question. The answer pretty much demonstration someone understanding of the market.

    If you turned down a job for only $4 dollars an hour how are you being exploited? Do you know how many people in the country earn less than the minimum wage? Employment opportunities are negotiated by the employer and employee. If you don't like what one job has to offer then you don't have to take the job. You can find a job which does suit your needs. Businesses compete for labor if by offering better wages and benefits, which like it was before the minimum wage was $2 dollars. Benefits are only available if the employee can afford them. If you mandate them, then there won't be as many jobs to go around.

    Children were only working during a time when America was more productive. It was uncommon for a child to be in the work force just like it was uncommon for a woman. Children were only working when the father was either away at war or away from the home. Children were very willing to work during that time period. There was no demand for child labor laws just like there was no demand for Social Security. It was mandated through the Great Depression new deal. One of the many reason why the Great Depression lasted as long as it did.

    If child labor laws were taken away, children would be rushed to the factors in thousands. No one would take their child out of school if they didn't think it was necessary.

    Generally, the whole "people will be exploited without unions" mantra is a farce.
     
  25. MissJonelyn

    MissJonelyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    6,144
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look again.

    The minimum wage was a dollar in 1960. The nominal rate was worth $5.50. Our $7.50 minimum wage is still worth what it was in 1960, maybe less. I guess you like inflation. Didn't teach you how that worked in business school?
     

Share This Page