Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LOL... tell us... just how low did you think the unemployment rate would go?
Shall we also take a look at the reality Obama promised?
Taxes were cut, where are the jobs?
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
LOL... tell us... just how low did you think the unemployment rate would go?
Shall we also take a look at the reality Obama promised?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO... created and saved... are you still bummed that after three years the unemployment rate remains above 8% where your Saint Obama said it would never go?
LMAO LOL LMFAO you moron.
Sorry - just doing my best SF.
Promises weren't met w/ either Bush or Obama. I never agreed w/ the Obama admin's projections - they were way too rosy, and they used them just to sell it.
However, there was a vast difference between the actions. Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible at the time, and not necessary. The stimulus was an action that had to happen, to stop the freefall.
But please, do tell us - do compare the 2 as though they are apples to apples.
I am bummed about that; however, I am also relieved that it's not in the teens.
You know what's going on; don't be a hack. The U.S. gov't can do very little at this point to change things. It's up to Europe & the world.
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
Onceler your last line nails it. If we did blind sentences and had a game who can match up the most, that one would be a freebie -it screams sf. Maybe we should do that!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes, stimulus was needed, but Obama completely failed in how he used the stimulus money. Bush was horrid fiscally, Obama is worse. He continues to piss away trillions and has done nothing to improve the economy.
Again, as far as unemployment... how low did you expect it to go after the tax cuts? It is a simple question.
SF is too easy - one of the most consistently revealing writing styles on the board.
That would be a fun game, though.
"Completely failed" is insane hyperbole. 3 million working people beg to differ with you. And one third was tax cuts. You're just mad because they didn't write it exactly as you thought it should be written.
Bush's admin promised certain GDP levels w/ the tax cuts; they fell well short of these, and even acknowledged as much (while making all kinds of excuses). Honestly, I don't feel like looking that stuff up now to appease you, but it was a fiscally irresponsible action that promised more than it delivered.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Bullshit. The US can do a lot to solidify our own economy. Yes, Europe and China are problems.
1) Eliminate the corporate tax, it is regressive
2) Eliminate the current tax code in its entirety, replace it with the flat tax proposal structure I have suggested as it will raise revenue and help eliminate fraud.
3) Promote a strong dollar policy
4) Take infrastructure spending for the years 2017-2020 and spend it now
5) Quit bailing out the states that are fiscally irresponsible
6) Break up the big banks and allow the components to survive or fail based on their merits
Just a few things the US government could do to solidify our economy
Side note: If the labor participation rate was anywhere near where it was in 2007, we would be in double digit unemployment right now.
Bush tax cuts could have been successful at creating jobs if it weren't for his war(s)....Obama's stimulus could have been successful if it were given with more stipulation and oversight. Both have been bad presidents IMO which is why I'm voting for change this year. I predict that Romney won't be much if any better but I'm willing to see.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
1) Bush tax cuts were a short term stimulus and they did exactly what they were designed to do.
2) The problem with tax cuts is that they must be met with corresponding spending cuts in order to work long term, this is where Bush failed (not to mention every President since Ike)
3) Take a good hard look at Gary Johnson...
I can respect that. I'm going third party this year.
With the stimulus, there were tons of flaws, because of the time factor. Personally, at the time, I was all for erring on the side of time sensitivity. Getting a much better bill, with better allocations and the kind of oversight you're referring to, would have taken months, and really hurt the economy, imo.
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
It's a really good thing you added the Gary this time. Good call.
I don't disagree w/ those measures, but they are basically token if Europe melts down.
I don't pretend to be up on this stuff enough to judge with confidence what you have proposed but some of it I can see working. I simply do not think that modeling our tax code and spending code after a failing Europe is the thing to do...which seems to be what some want to do. I do think that businesses can pay slightly more taxes. Take the oil industry for example. I truly think if it weren't for greed they could pay more taxes and not raise the cost of fuel significantly. I can't help but notice their profit margins. Also, if we tax them slightly more, let them drill. But then one side proposes on thing (raise their taxes but don't let them drill) and the other side proposes the other (let them drill but don't raise their taxes).
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I would eliminate the corporate tax. Put the tax where it belongs... on the shareholders via capital gains and dividends and on the employees who earn their living from the companies (especially the executives who make insane amounts of money).
If you tax a corporation there are four groups that tax could end up with...
1) Shareholders
2) Corp executives
3) Remaining employees
4) Consumers
The executives (who typically are also large shareholders) are the ones deciding who to pass the tax on to. Of the four groups above, who do you think they will pass it to if they can?
If we also eliminate the current tax code for individuals and replace it with a flat tax on all income (with a high standard deduction)... that eliminates the low rates for capital gains (which are low due to double taxation issues)
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
OH! So we aren't counting the jobs lost when we tabulate how many total jobs were created? Then Bush didn't just create 8 million, it was more like 12 million. See, even if we move the goal posts around, Bush still did way better by reducing taxes than Obama has done with Keynesian policy.
And while you idiots are cheering over 3 million jobs in 4 years, tell me something... did we not have ANY people enter the workforce in 4 years? I mean, we've had at least 4 graduating classes from college, that has to be several thousand people, right there. I remember months and months, when Bush was getting jobs reports of +250k, and you all claimed that wasn't even really "growth" because of all the new people entering the workforce. What's the deal, when Obama won the presidency, people stopped entering the workforce or something? OR am I just forgetting to add the 10% unemployed under Obama, versus the 4.5% under Bush?
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
It would be awesome if Romney ran on eliminating the corporate tax. I would lmao. But that'll never happen. Oh well.
Whatever positive results Bush got from those cuts was wiped away & then some with the crash that happened on his watch, and largely due to his policies (or lack thereof).
I'm sure you guys thought the leaders of Enron were doing a bang-up job right up until the day the bottom fell out.