User avatar
Dreadnought
Topic Author
Posts: 9816
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:22 pm

Watch it live here

http://news.yahoo.com/video/us-15749625/22309266

I'm wait if he puts forward any ideas that would really affect job growth. He can declare a moratorium on the government acting as union enforcers (Boeing in South Carolina) and on the government acting on every inconsequential regulation (Gibson Guitars)
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
seb146
Posts: 13783
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:28 pm

People wanted Obama to give a plan to crate jobs. Well, he is laying out a plan. All of a sudden, it is a campaign speech?? I wish the right would make up their minds what they want from him. Oh, that's right... They just want him gone. They have no plan. Except to get Obama out.
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:30 pm

...and of course my company hasn't updated our flash players in ages and all the channels seem to be using that format! SO ANNOYING!!!!      
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 pm

Started off pissed as hell, turned into a damn good speech. Like him or hate him, Obama has a talent for formal speeches like this. More later - time now to watch the NFL season get underway.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Topic Author
Posts: 9816
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:50 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
People wanted Obama to give a plan to crate jobs. Well, he is laying out a plan. All of a sudden, it is a campaign speech?? I wish the right would make up their minds what they want from him. Oh, that's right... They just want him gone. They have no plan. Except to get Obama out.

Albert Einstein once said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". Spending more stimulus won't help the economy. Keynesian stimulus does not work - that's been proven over the past 3 years.

All I heard today is more "tax the rich more" and "more stimulus spending", and a few extra tax loopholes/deductions thrown in (after complaining about loopholes and deductions - ???    ).

If he thinks that a small business like mine will hire more because of the proposed $4K credit, he's smoking something. Sure, we'd love to have the credits, but our decision whether to hire someone is guided 100% by whether we have the work to justify the new position - that's it.

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):
He can declare a moratorium on the government acting as union enforcers (Boeing in South Carolina) and on the government acting on every inconsequential regulation (Gibson Guitars)

Those won't cost we the taxpayers a single dime, and alleviate a lot of the "batten down the hatches" feeling in business today.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:57 pm

The only job Obama is trying to save is his

He us a politician by definition he cares about no one else
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:06 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 3):
Started off pissed as hell, turned into a damn good speech. Like him or hate him, Obama has a talent for formal speeches like this. More later - time now to watch the NFL season get underway.

He has great talent for speeches, honestly that and hatred for Bush are the two reasons he is President. The speech was good. The plane nothing special, a bit more money then I thought it will be. It is a decent plan though we will see how much he will work with Republicans to get it done.

This just reminded me how big the Federal Government is, just way too big.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
People wanted Obama to give a plan to crate jobs. Well, he is laying out a plan. All of a sudden, it is a campaign speech?? I wish the right would make up their minds what they want from him. Oh, that's right... They just want him gone. They have no plan. Except to get Obama out.

You seriously do not think elections had something to do with this?? Dont forget the orginal date and time he wanted to do this speech.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:11 am

[quote=Dreadnought,reply=4] Sure, we'd love to have the credits.


I guess just on Conservative Republican principles, you had better turn them down. A credit is a loss of revenue for the government, so it could be thought of as more government spending, or more public subsidy of private business. It seems funny that business does not have any problem with credits, loopholes etc, that suck revenue out of the government revenue stream, but want to cut the spending at the same time. Funny that.

[Edited 2011-09-08 17:12:25]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
einsteinboricua
Posts: 4617
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:14 am

For some reason, my browser only showed some parts since it froze up many times. Now, IMO, I thought it would be just another speech and in this one he would have had to demonstrate to me that he is up to the challenge. He stepped up.

Tonight, the GOP has literally no excuses to not work with Obama. They campaigned on a platform of jobs. It's been nearly 9 months since the new Congress was sworn in and still not one bill has been passed by either chamber promoting jobs. Obama took the first step and incorporated many ideas (including ones that enjoy broad bipartisanship, so there's no denying any compromise here). The ball is in the GOP's court. Will they play or will they sit out? Either way, they are between a rock and a hard place: if they play along, many conservative constituents might create an uproar and take them out next election. Do nothing and constituents will still take them out.

The GOP should now realize which one is the lesser evil: caring about their constituents or caring about themselves?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:18 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
All I heard today is more "tax the rich more"

And? Is there anyone on here who considers themselves Rich? Now Buffett is rich, the man, who started Home Depot is rich, he has no problem paying more either. He said so on the Cavuto Show. Cavuto is on Fox, in case you do not watch Fox.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:26 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 9):
And? Is there anyone on here who considers themselves Rich? Now Buffett is rich, the man, who started Home Depot is rich, he has no problem paying more either. He said so on the Cavuto Show. Cavuto is on Fox, in case you do not watch Fox.

Raise taxes on people making millions a bit sure, but a very small amount increase IMO. Make GE and Exxon pay some taxes etc.. Yes sure but not too much we need them to want to expand and create jobs. The problem with Obama and the Democrats plans are WHO ARE THR RICH? At one point is was families making 200K or more, then 250K or more. IMO a FAMILY (not a person) , two people who bring in under 300K a year is not rich enough to have taxes increased. So there needs to be a number to work with. I have always hear 250K and that is not rich these days. The other problem is people never work for poor people they work for rich people. We do not want to take too much out of these people pockets. If multi millionaires and billionaires think the tax code is unfair then they can donate money to the government or charity. However what is also not fair is that almost 50% of American pay NO taxes at all. So the rich who work hard for a lot of their money should give more and more?
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:30 am

While delivered well, with some good points and serious flaws, we need to see the details to fully understand his proposals and hope it doesn't get ruined by big corp lobbyists and selfish persons bribing and narrow-mined politicians.
 
Cadet985
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 6:45 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:35 am

I watched the speech hoping to hear some good ideas. I did not. It seemed like most of what he spoke about was building and renovating schools and hiring teachers...and expanding our transportation network. Sorry...neither of those helps me. I was hoping he might say something about a program to help college graduates deal with loans...nothing.

Looks like I'm still screwed in terms of finding a job.

Maybe I'll find a job in Israel when I'm there in December...

Marc
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:36 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 10):
Raise taxes on people making millions a bit sure, but a very small amount increase IMO. Make GE and Exxon pay some taxes etc.. Yes sure but not too much we need them to want to expand and create jobs. The problem with Obama and the Democrats plans are WHO ARE THR RICH? At one point is was families making 200K or more, then 250K or more. IMO a FAMILY (not a person) , two people who bring in under 300K a year is not rich enough to have taxes increased. So there needs to be a number to work with. I have always hear 250K and that is not rich these days. The other problem is people never work for poor people they work for rich people. We do not want to take too much out of these people pockets. If multi millionaires and billionaires think the tax code is unfair then they can donate money to the government or charity. However what is also not fair is that almost 50% of American pay NO taxes at all. So the rich who work hard for a lot of their money should give more and more?

Complicated issue, no doubt. I would take issue with the 250-300k per year couples , not being able to pay more. I suggest you ask anyone making 40K per year, about that. I can afford to pay more, why not them?
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:38 am

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 11):
While delivered well, with some good points and serious flaws, we need to see the details to fully understand his proposals and hope it doesn't get ruined by big corp lobbyists and selfish persons bribing and narrow-mined politicians.

Agreed. Great point.

Also just to make another point because I know it will likely be brought up. To those people saying, "hey Warren Buffet pays less taxes then his secretary," it is because Buffet pays Capital Gains taxes, the secretary does Income taxes. He of course still gives the goverments probably tens if not closer to 100 million dollars a year.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:41 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 13):
Complicated issue, no doubt. I would take issue with the 250-300k per year couples , not being able to pay more. I suggest you ask anyone making 40K per year, about that. I can afford to pay more, why not them?

I will say that is impressive that you think your able to pay more. Good job balancing your finances! But honestly 250K for a family of four. That is not a lot of money.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Topic Author
Posts: 9816
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:41 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
I guess just on Conservative Republican principles, you had better turn them down. A credit is a loss of revenue for the government, so it could be thought of as more government spending, or more public subsidy of private business. It seems funny that business does not have any problem with credits, loopholes etc, that suck revenue out of the government revenue stream, but want to cut the spending at the same time. Funny that.

Unlike liberals, we do not consider government NOT taxing us as a government expense. Whenever people say that a tax rate reduction "cost" X billion dollars, it generates bales of derisive laughter. You just don't get it.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 8):

The GOP should now realize which one is the lesser evil: caring about their constituents or caring about themselves?

And any politician who cares about their constituents will STOP THE DAMNED SPENDING. We added $5 trillion of deficits in the past 3 years - we've shot the wad - if $5 trillion didn't get us any jobs, $400 billion won't. It's just throwing good money after bad. Jobs will come if Obama declares a moratorium on all new regulations, and starts to relax existing ones (Boeing and Gibson being some of the more egregious examples).

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 9):

And? Is there anyone on here who considers themselves Rich? Now Buffett is rich, the man, who started Home Depot is rich, he has no problem paying more either. He said so on the Cavuto Show. Cavuto is on Fox, in case you do not watch Fox.

Fine. But A) Don't group these hypermillionaires with people making $2-300K per year, and B) as has been explained before, if you taxed all millionaires at 100%, you'd only collect about $800 billion - a fraction of what you need to cover the deficit. Not to mention that you would get that $800 billion just ONE time - they will then leave the country and/or close their businesses, and to quote "Full Metal Jacket", then we would be in a world of shit.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:44 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 14):
Also just to make another point because I know it will likely be brought up. To those people saying, "hey Warren Buffet pays less taxes then his secretary," it is because Buffet pays Capital Gains taxes, the secretary does Income taxes. He of course still gives the goverments probably tens if not closer to 100 million dollars a year."It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying

The question then is, why does Buffett, and the man from Home Depot say the same. They can afford to pay more.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Okie
Posts: 3532
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:45 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):

People wanted Obama to give a plan to crate jobs. Well, he is laying out a plan. All of a sudden, it is a campaign speech??


Please point me to what legislation. what plan are you talking about, please so I can do some research.
Oh there is none, its a campaign speech. This is an absolute crisis we should maybe come up with something to look at oh maybe a few weeks farther down the road.
Just sign a $450B stimulus check and we will fill in the details and legislation later?
The last stimulus $830B, depending on who you ask, only somewhere between 3% and 9% went to infrastructure the rest for political patronage. I do not think you are going to find very many people willing to pay $450B for a $1.49 bag of sakrete to plug one pothole.
Sorry just another campaign speech.

Okie
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:49 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 15):
will say that is impressive that you think your able to pay more. Good job balancing your finances! But honestly 250K for a family of four. That is not a lot of money.

As Obama said, I worked hard, I saved, I reaped the rewards of the then America. I am willing and able to contribute more for the future children of the US. They include my Grandchildren. I was not tought greed, selfishness either. A different age.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:58 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
Unlike liberals, we do not consider government NOT taxing us as a government expense. Whenever people say that a tax rate reduction "cost" X billion dollars, it generates bales of derisive laughter. You just don't get it.

As usual a Republican generic copout. I belong to a nation. I swore my military oath to the United States, not to myself.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
Fine. But A) Don't group these hypermillionaires with people making $2-300K per year

As I said earlier, I suggest you ask the person making 40k a year, and even that is a very high average wage, when we talk about the job creators, such as non- union small business. 40K is the median income in R.I. Imagine other areas, which I will not mention.

[Edited 2011-09-08 18:25:40]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:01 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 20):
I belong to a nation. I swore my military oath to the United States, not to myself.

That is a highly disturbing statement that has caused much pain to the world in the past. Thankfully, we've been moving away from this for a while now.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:03 am

Quoting okie (Reply 18):
Please point me to what legislation. what plan are you talking about, please so I can do some research.
Oh there is none, its a campaign speech. This is an absolute crisis we should maybe come up with something to look at oh maybe a few weeks farther down the road.
Just sign a $450B stimulus check and we will fill in the details and legislation later?
The last stimulus $830B, depending on who you ask, only somewhere between 3% and 9% went to infrastructure the rest for political patronage. I do not think you are going to find very many people willing to pay $450B for a $1.49 bag of sakrete to plug one pothole.
Sorry just another campaign speech.

I have to think that Obama has something wriiten down, maybe on his cuff. I mean congress is dysfunctional, but they do have to pass a written bill. I wonder, have you ever heard a speech from a politician that was not political? Get real!
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Okie
Posts: 3532
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:10 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 22):
I wonder, have you ever heard a speech from a politician that was not political


That was a reply to whether it was a campaign speech please read.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 22):
Get real!


I am, its a campaign speech.
Please reference me to some legislation to which the speech addressed.

Okie
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:11 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 21):
That is a highly disturbing statement that has caused much pain to the world in the past. Thankfully, we've been moving away from this for a while now.

Ask any service member of the US, ask the US President. Who do they pledge to defend? If this has changed, could you show me where?
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:22 am

Quoting okie (Reply 23):
am, its a campaign speech.
Please reference me to some legislation to which the speech addressed.

Ho hum, it is a proposed jobs package to congress, to be negotiated, written, and voted on. That is the way our government works. He touched on the important points of the proposed legislation.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Okie
Posts: 3532
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:39 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 25):
He touched on the important points of the proposed legislation.


No legislation and no indication of exactly how he is going to pay for it.

Do not get me wrong there were a few ideas that he has adopted from private sector that I agree with.

Let see what legislation he will present here in a few weeks with his next campaign speech.

For all you know he could be taking the $450B out of SS or Veterans Benefits.

Okie
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:42 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 17):
The question then is, why does Buffett, and the man from Home Depot say the same. They can afford to pay more.

Well because they are exceptionally wealthy and pay almost no income taxes. Or most of their income does not come from a salary. I am sure if Buffet was giving 40% of all his income he would not be saying the same thing.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 21):
That is a highly disturbing statement that has caused much pain to the world in the past. Thankfully, we've been moving away from this for a while now.

What in the world is that suppose to mean?
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:47 am

Quoting okie (Reply 26):
For all you know he could be taking the $450B out of SS or Veterans Benefits.

It is possible, so is higher taxes in the end product. They were mentioned along with cuts, and reforms. Who really knows?
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8467
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:58 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 27):
Well because they are exceptionally wealthy and pay almost no income taxes. Or most of their income does not come from a salary. I am sure if Buffet was giving 40% of all his income he would not be saying the same thing.

It has always intriqued me about such a thing. If you make a million, a billion, and you do pay 40 % tax, you will still be wealthy. I remember Ted Turner saying something about losing 1 billion, or some amount, he said, he was certainly not going to starve. To me, that is what is important, they can live well, their family lives well, they can leave their family wealthy, how much do you need, when you have it all? It must then come down to power over others, nothing else.

[Edited 2011-09-08 18:59:37]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:20 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 15):
But honestly 250K for a family of four. That is not a lot of money.

Wow. You're really out of touch with what most people in this country earn if you think $250k per year is not a lot of money. That's a LOT of money in normal circles of life. It's not a Warren B lot or anything, but if you can't buy a nice house, save, travel and live well on that with a fair bit to spare then there's a problem.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:32 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 29):
It has always intriqued me about such a thing. If you make a million, a billion, and you do pay 40 % tax, you will still be wealthy. I remember Ted Turner saying something about losing 1 billion, or some amount, he said, he was certainly not going to starve. To me, that is what is important, they can live well, their family lives well, they can leave their family wealthy, how much do you need, when you have it all? It must then come down to power over others, nothing else.

What's wrong with having a lot of money that you earned? Yeah, I say close the loopholes and tax them at the same percentage, but it scares me that so many people think the end to the recession is to just tax the rich exorbitantly. As Dreadnought even pointed out, you can take ALL their money and we'd still be in big trouble (even more actually.) No, we need leadership and a plan.
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:57 am

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 30):
Wow. You're really out of touch with what most people in this country earn if you think $250k per year is not a lot of money. That's a LOT of money in normal circles of life. It's not a Warren B lot or anything, but if you can't buy a nice house, save, travel and live well on that with a fair bit to spare then there's a problem.

Ok I can agree with what you said on some levels. At the same time President Obama puts this 250K thing up there like these people are millionaires controlling the world. 250K a year for a family of four living in DC, NYC, LA, Chicago, Miami is not tax all the money you want type of money. Dont forget 250K a year is BEFORE taxes. I am not talking people, I am talking about family combine salaries, just like Obama does.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 29):
It has always intriqued me about such a thing. If you make a million, a billion, and you do pay 40 % tax, you will still be wealthy. I remember Ted Turner saying something about losing 1 billion, or some amount, he said, he was certainly not going to starve. To me, that is what is important, they can live well, their family lives well, they can leave their family wealthy, how much do you need, when you have it all? It must then come down to power over others, nothing else.

I see where your coming from. And I can only hope one day I have the problem of paying too much taxes  but at the same time they have earned their money, it is their money. They can do as they wish. If they want to buy a private 757 or homes around the world good for them! They earned it. Or their family in some cases either way it is their money do what they want. They should spend it. Also not only should they spend it but they should also hire people, invest in capital and donate to charity which is exactly what wealthy people do. They get a bad rap for buying expensive cars and homes or flying in a private jet. But they also employee people and donate lots of money to many different causes.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:18 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Keynesian stimulus does not work - that's been proven over the past 3 years.

Three years is a laughably short time span to evaluate an economic strategy.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Sure, we'd love to have the credits, but our decision whether to hire someone is guided 100% by whether we have the work to justify the new position - that's it.

True, and I wish he'd emphasized that more - the real problem in the US economy is not one of regulation (though there are areas where things could be simplified), or that the wealthy are taxed too much, but rather that there just isn't enough demand. The people at the top have recovered decently, but without sufficient money in the middle class to allow them to buy things, the economy isn't going to grow. That's the problem that needs to be solved. And the payroll tax deduction will help with that somewhat, but I'm of the mindset that more needs to be done.

Quoting flymia (Reply 6):

You seriously do not think elections had something to do with this?? Dont forget the orginal date and time he wanted to do this speech.

Primetime on the first day Congress was back in session - makes perfect sense. That there happened to be a Republican debate scheduled for that night doesn't make a difference.

Quoting flymia (Reply 10):
I have always hear 250K and that is not rich these days.

If you're taking in $250K net (i.e. you're not making $250k but spending $100k in business expenses), that is pretty rich. Maybe not if you live in the middle of NYC, but in most places in the country, that sort of income will leave you very well off.

Quoting flymia (Reply 10):
The other problem is people never work for poor people they work for rich people.

I'm not quite sure how this fallacy got started, but it needs to end. People have jobs because there are customers that demand those jobs. No customers, no job. And unless you work in specific sectors of the economy, your customers are, for the most part, not going to be rich. Your paycheck might come from a rich person, but it's not really their money in that check - it's the customers' money.

Which is why the whole idea of reducing taxes on the wealthy as a means to create jobs is bogus. You can cut taxes on the wealthy entirely, but that's not going to result in jobs being created. And why should it? All that money saved in taxes would just be getting thrown away from paying the extra employees that weren't really needed. The middle class drives the economy, not the wealthy, and it's the middle class that is struggling and needs to be helped out.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
B) as has been explained before, if you taxed all millionaires at 100%, you'd only collect about $800 billion - a fraction of what you need to cover the deficit.

If $800 billion is only a fraction of the deficit, then imagine the fraction of that fraction you'd get by raising taxes on the middle class and the poor the way some conservatives have suggested in the name of "fairness". And then imagine the negative effect that would have on demand, and the further negative effect that would have on job creation.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 31):
it scares me that so many people think the end to the recession is to just tax the rich exorbitantly.

It scares me that you think that people think that taxing the rich will solve the recession on its own. Of course it won't solve it on its own - that doesn't mean it shouldn't be part of the package.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
N867DA
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 12:53 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:25 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 27):
What in the world is that suppose to mean?

It means someone has an unhealthy crush on Ayn Rand. I wouldn't give it much thought.
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you
 
seb146
Posts: 13783
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:41 am

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Spending more stimulus won't help the economy. Keynesian stimulus does not work - that's been proven over the past 3 years.

Actually, the stimulus worked. And worked much better than cutting taxes. How many jobs has cutting taxes created? Look at the number of jobs created when Clinton raised taxes as opposed to the number of jobs created when GWB, GHWB, Reagan slashed taxes.
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:42 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 1):
They have no plan. Except to get Obama out.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 9):
Now Buffett is rich, the man, who started Home Depot is rich, he has no problem paying more either. He said so on the Cavuto Show. Cavuto is on Fox, in case you do not watch Fox.

Buffet's company has a problem paying their taxes right now.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...s-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html
If his company can't manage, and he is playing the hide the wealth game with his income, I'd say his integrity in this matter is subject to debate.

Quoting flymia (Reply 10):
Make GE and Exxon pay some taxes etc.. Yes sure but not too much we need them to want to expand and create jobs.

How about we try something different. How about we give them some tax amenesty to bring the billions they have overseas back onshore and give them credits to build plants and employ people in this country instead of overseas? Of course that is dependent on the labor department not demanding that they have to be union jobs paying such a high wage for entry level work that they price themselves out of the market place.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 11):
While delivered well, with some good points and serious flaws, we need to see the details to fully understand his proposals and hope it doesn't get ruined by big corp lobbyists and selfish persons bribing and narrow-mined politicians

Those damn details, trips him up every time doesn't it?

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 25):
Ho hum, it is a proposed jobs package to congress, to be negotiated, written, and voted on.

To which you have to have that package on paper, in detail, which we don't have, again, since he won't be releasing the details of how it is paid for until a few days from now.

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
No customers, no job.

Unless, of course, you work for a public sector union, or the post office.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 35):
ually, the stimulus worked. And worked much better than cutting taxes. How many jobs has cutting taxes created? Look at the number of jobs created when Clinton raised taxes as opposed to the number of jobs created when GWB, GHWB, Reagan slashed taxes.

Maybe you had better take a look first. The unemployment rate was lower during the Bush 43 years than during the Clinton years.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
n318ea
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:56 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:52 am

What a pathetic Zero President ZeroBama has become. Same tired class warfare and $2-3,000,000 per job saved or created bull-sh@t.
Red Red Red Red Red Neck!
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:59 am

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
Sounds like a good plan to me.

Stalling for 14 months is no plan at all.

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
Unless, of course, you work for a public sector union, or the post office.

Are you suggesting that we should have more of those in order to simply provide employment to people? It would solve the employment problem, sure, but then we'd probably hear endless whining about the size of government.  

So if that's not an option (and I don't think it should be), you're going to have to solve the demand problem before things get better.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
MCOGVADCA
Posts: 242
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:05 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:24 am

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
How about we try something different. How about we give them some tax amenesty to bring the billions they have overseas back onshore and give them credits to build plants and employ people in this country instead of overseas?

  . This is a potential 1 trillion USD stimulus into the economy that could be used to appease both Republican and Democratic constituents. The notion, largely perpetuated by the Dems, that these earnings somehow should be taxed is erroneous in the first place. The fact is, such a plan would create middle class jobs (appealing to the Democratic base), would send the stock market skyrocketing and allow companies whose stocks like Microsoft to increase their dividend substantially. The fact is, America has no right (few if any other OECD countries maintain a tax regime with this absurd regulation) to these earnings, and companies are happy to keep that money offshore until a tax holiday is declared, or make acquisitions offshore (like Microsoft's recent purchase of Skype). This is win, win, win for all parties.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Keynesian stimulus does not work - that's been proven over the past 3 years.

Attempting to debunk neo-Keynesian economic policies based on the past three years is intellectually disingenuous. First, in order for Keynesian or neo-Keynesian policies to be effective, they have to be employed for an entire economic cycle; because, during our boom years, we were still engaging in massive amounts of deficit spending (instead of 'saving for a rainy day' as is advocated by Keynesian thought), this rendered the efficacy of spending more impotent that it would have been otherwise. Second, it takes years and years before the dividends or detriments of economic policies arise. Two examples: Reagan laying the economic foundation for the Clinton boom years, and, conversely, five to ten years into Communism in the Soviet Union, and they still looked pretty damned formidable.

Have the neo-Keynesian policies employed by Obama worked thusfar? Nope. However, to conflate this and a statement of categorical failure for the theory in general is at best, overly reductionist.

What both parties have struggled to realize is that we're in the midst of a secular change in employment in America; The recession merely exacerbated the cracks that had already started to form. It is highly unlikely that any administration would be able to remedy the structural problems with our economy in this short period of time. At this point, it's not politically savvy to own up to the realities of secular global economic trends and how to adapt accordingly; false promises that harken back to the good ole days (I'm looking at you, Bachmann. Two dollar oil? The fact that someone that would one minute say something that is so economically disingenuous and then the next, have the audacity to claim that the current president has no ability to run the economy is the epitome of hypocrisy, and the fact that she is able to run for president is indicative that our political process is broken ) are delusional and simply unattainable in the 21st century global economy and will merely prevent us from adapting our workforce to thrive in this newest manifestation of global commerce.

Best plan thusfar: Huntsman's. Tax code simplification (that ends up being a tax cut for most middle classers), ending the wars, and increased energy independence (and the jobs that such an initiative would provide), as well as eliminating a number of regulations that impede small business. The next: Obama's. (Though I agree with others that there should be a distinction between 200/300k and 1mil. Depending on location, that is a substantial difference and shouldn't be taxed at the same rate). As the Kauffman Institute's study shows, the vast majority of net jobs are created by new businesses (or "gazelles" as opposed to "elephants" like entrenched multinationals). Anything to stimulate these new businesses into a) being founded b) continuing to hire can only ameliorate the economy. As well, our dilapidated infrastructure desperately needs to be updated and, intellectually, should be supported by both parties (even if it doesn't dovetail politically in the current environment) as it will create short-term blue collar jobs (for zee Dems) and long-term will provide infrastructure which allows businesses to operate more efficiently (which the Republicans have long called for).

[Edited 2011-09-08 23:26:16]
12 months: mdl heh rgn kmg nng sha gmp icn can pvg sfo mco lwc sin dps cdg gva
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5260
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:49 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
How about we give them some tax amenesty to bring the billions they have overseas back onshore and give them credits to build plants and employ people in this country instead of overseas?

And what happens when instead of creating new jobs, they just give all their management bigger bonuses? This is what will really happen because even with tax credits, it will still be cheaper to do work overseas.

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
Of course that is dependent on the labor department not demanding that they have to be union jobs paying such a high wage for entry level work that they price themselves out of the market place.

Just remember that when your employer wants you to work for $8.00/hr because your current salary is too high for the marketplace. Have fun saving for retirement and caring for a family on that wage.

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
The unemployment rate was lower during the Bush 43 years than during the Clinton years.

Massive infusions of credit and government spending will do that.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:09 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
I'm not quite sure how this fallacy got started, but it needs to end. People have jobs because there are customers that demand those jobs. No customers, no job. And unless you work in specific sectors of the economy, your customers are, for the most part, not going to be rich. Your paycheck might come from a rich person, but it's not really their money in that check - it's the customers' money.


Wealth comes from production, not consumption. That costumer you talk about can only afford to buy anything if he first produces something. The economy is based on the exchange of goods and services. Monetarism doesn't change this fact, it only greases the wheels.


Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
Which is why the whole idea of reducing taxes on the wealthy as a means to create jobs is bogus. You can cut taxes on the wealthy entirely, but that's not going to result in jobs being created. And why should it? All that money saved in taxes would just be getting thrown away from paying the extra employees that weren't really needed. The middle class drives the economy, not the wealthy, and it's the middle class that is struggling and needs to be helped out.

On the contrary. A reduction in taxes is an increase in the incentive to produce more. More production = more jobs. More production allows for increased consumption.

The bogus theory is the one that claims consumption can exist before production.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:50 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 36):
How about we try something different. How about we give them some tax amenesty to bring the billions they have overseas back onshore and give them credits to build plants and employ people in this country instead of overseas? Of course that is dependent on the labor department not demanding that they have to be union jobs paying such a high wage for entry level work that they price themselves out of the market place.

I agree with that! I am all for less taxes, but that GE paid $0 is a bit concerning. Do I want them to pay 35% or even 10% of their earning? No I dont. But I think 5% would be a fair number. But your right we need money to come back into the US and we need to make this a job freindly market for large companies. Unions do not help the economy and are only hurting it. Us on Anet know this first hand IMO. Look what unions have done to airlines. Look at AA and their cost structure because of their unions.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 40):

And what happens when instead of creating new jobs, they just give all their management bigger bonuses? This is what will really happen because even with tax credits, it will still be cheaper to do work overseas.

Another reason why regulation needs to be cut, all the regulations the US government puts on these companies and their high corporate tax rates cause companies to move overseas.

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
I'm not quite sure how this fallacy got started, but it needs to end. People have jobs because there are customers that demand those jobs. No customers, no job. And unless you work in specific sectors of the economy, your customers are, for the most part, not going to be rich. Your paycheck might come from a rich person, but it's not really their money in that check - it's the customers' money.

You said it your self. The pay check comes for the rich person. They are the ones who invest in starting a company, they are the ones who risk their money trying to make money and the risk they take includes giving jobs and producing a product. They are on the top of the chain.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5260
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:01 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 41):
A reduction in taxes is an increase in the incentive to produce more.

Not necessarily. Many companies have gotten tax breaks over the years, only to turn right around and cut production and ship jobs overseas anyway.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 41):
The bogus theory is the one that claims consumption can exist before production.

But there has to be demand for a product, otherwise why produce it in the first place. I would never go out and start producing widgets, if I knew no one wanted to buy widgets.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:28 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 43):
Not necessarily. Many companies have gotten tax breaks over the years, only to turn right around and cut production and ship jobs overseas anyway.

Taxes are one factor companies consider. Tax cuts are often small, or temporary like the one Obama is proposing.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 43):
But there has to be demand for a product, otherwise why produce it in the first place. I would never go out and start producing widgets, if I knew no one wanted to buy widgets.

Correct. If I want the widget you produce, I can get it if I produce something you value. . . or, thanks to our monetary system, we don't have to worry matching exactly what you and I want since we can both create something and sell it to anybody, in exchange for a medium that is widely accepted (money) and I still can get your widget even if you have no use for my goods/services. Or vice versa.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:34 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 41):
A reduction in taxes is an increase in the incentive to produce more.

Hardly. The only incentive to produce more is an increase in demand. A reduction in taxes only greases the wheels.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 41):
The bogus theory is the one that claims consumption can exist before production.

A desire for consumption has to exist before production. You can cut a business owner's taxes all you want, but if nobody is buying what he's selling, he's not going to be adding any jobs (if he's smart - he might not be, but he'll either figure it out eventually or go bankrupt, and whatever jobs he erroneously created will disappear at that point).

Quoting flymia (Reply 42):
The pay check comes for the rich person. They are the ones who invest in starting a company, they are the ones who risk their money trying to make money and the risk they take includes giving jobs and producing a product.

And they wouldn't do any of that without a market.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 43):
But there has to be demand for a product, otherwise why produce it in the first place. I would never go out and start producing widgets, if I knew no one wanted to buy widgets.

To be more precise, our problem is not that nobody wants to buy widgets - it's that people can't afford widgets.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
windy95
Posts: 2658
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 2:42 pm

What a joke...More lipstick on the same old tired pig..
 
MCOGVADCA
Posts: 242
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:05 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:19 pm

Quoting flymia (Reply 42):
But your right we need money to come back into the US and we need to make this a job freindly market for large companies. Unions do not help the economy and are only hurting it. Us on Anet know this first hand IMO. Look what unions have done to airlines. Look at AA and their cost structure because of their unions.

   Well put, flymia. No better example than AA's cost structure (though the auto industry and teachers unions also make fantastic examples); imagine how much more fortress-y MIA would be if AA could expand without having to deal with these absurd constraints!

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 43):
Not necessarily. Many companies have gotten tax breaks over the years, only to turn right around and cut production and ship jobs overseas anyway.

Treating all tax cuts as a monolithic entity is an economic fallacy. For example, political economy scholars like Gilpin have long argued that multinational corporations have no inherent allegiance to the well-being of their own nation (though they may seek protection from their home government) and have a singular, overriding goal: to make money for shareholders. Therefore, political economic theory indicates that tax breaks to multinational corporations will serve to enhance their profitability, and will benefit certain segments of the economy (wealthy shareholders, pensioners, certain elements of the middle class), but will not benefit the lower swathes of society as multinational corporations will take advantage of increased efficiencies and lower costs in different markets. While this is good for the global economy, outsourcing is problematic for the lower and lower-middle classes. That is why these tax-cuts, targeted at middle class consumption and productivity, have a decent chance of catalyzing job growth in the United States. New net jobs, for the majority, come from new companies and any taxes/elimination in bureaucracy will likely stimulate job growth in the country. Tax cuts to entrenched multinationals are unnecessary because corporate health is fine in our country and have proved to exacerbate wealth disparity in our country; However, tax cuts to middle class businesses are more likely to stimulate the creation of new jobs.
12 months: mdl heh rgn kmg nng sha gmp icn can pvg sfo mco lwc sin dps cdg gva
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:50 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
if you taxed all millionaires at 100%, you'd only collect about $800 billion

Source?

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Keynesian stimulus does not work - that's been proven over the past 3 years.

Three years is a laughably short time span to evaluate an economic strategy.

Not when it such a myopic observation appears to align with one's previously held beliefs.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Topic Author
Posts: 9816
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Obama's Jobs Speech Discussion Thread

Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:50 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):
If $800 billion is only a fraction of the deficit, then imagine the fraction of that fraction you'd get by raising taxes on the middle class and the poor the way some conservatives have suggested in the name of "fairness". And then imagine the negative effect that would have on demand, and the further negative effect that would have on job creation.

Let's take 2009 for example. The gross revenue numbers are from the link below.

"Millionaires & Billionaires" = $726 billion total / 178 billion paid in taxes (25%)
Revenue between $200K-1 million = 1,237 billion / 257 billion taxes (21%)
Revenue between $50K-200K = 3,940 billion / 371 billion taxes (10%)
Revenue below 50K = 1,920 billion / 60 billion (5%)

The bulk of the taxable revenue in this country is squarely the middle class, those currently paying, on average, 10% of their gross income in federal taxes. Unless you are planning to gut the small business sector (which makes up the bulk of that 200K-1 million tier), if you want to continue spending what Obama wants to spend, it is the middle class - 50K-200K. who's going to have to ante up the most.

Quoting Mir (Reply 33):

Three years is a laughably short time span to evaluate an economic strategy.

Excuse me? What is the whole point of Keynesian stimulus (Fiscal)? It is supposed to be a rapid, short term boost to the economy. If the stimulus takes 2-3 years or more to take effect, then there is no point to it as generally recessions don't last that long and you're just pouring gasoline on a fire that's already burning. What you said just further decreases the validity of Keynesian stimulus even further.

Quoting D L X (Reply 48):
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
if you taxed all millionaires at 100%, you'd only collect about $800 billion

Source?

The IRS, latest statistics (2009). The actual total comes up to $727 billion in 2009.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/09in11si.xls
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Francoflier and 6 guests