"You've had your tax breaks for 10 years, where are the jobs?"

[Freeper]

democrat_patriot (2,314 posts)

 
"You've had your tax breaks for 10 years, where are the jobs?"


Simple question all Republicans need to answer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002926326

I thought the DUmmies were claiming that 0bama had created gazillions of new jobs, now they are claiming there are no jobs. Which is it DUmmies?

[Kyle Ricky]

Wow, they finally realizing that there are no jobs? Gee ... Obama's policies are why there are no jobs. He is forcing companies to leave the country. If you would actually read a news paper, or watch a real news station besides the fake news MSNBC, you would see that there are numerous businesses who have stated that they will not hire as long as Obama is President because of all the taxes and burden he wants to put on them.

And also, Democrat_Patriot, you stupid retard. The reason that not one jobs bill that Obama has tried to pass passed is because, just like everything else he tries to pass, they included taxing the individuals who make more than $250,000.00 a year into bankruptcy! Maybe if he would get his head out of his ass and pass something that make some sense, he would have accomplished something. You know it is bed when even Harry Reid refuses to bring his Jobs bill up for a vote! Maybe it is because he knows that a 3rd grader could come up with a better one.

Side note: I read the thread. You are correct that jobs are in China and over seas. That is because that is what Obama wants. We are no longer an industrialized country, we are a service country. It is the socialist way you know

[Karin]

We are no longer an industrialized country, we are a service country

The envirofreaks do not let us make anything anymore.  It would be next to impossible to greenfield a factory of any sort now.  It might annoy a certain stinkbug.  That's why there are no jobs. 

[Danglars]

What tax breaks?

We needed a reduction further than Bush's cuts in all tax rates in the depths of a recession, and we sure didn't need an argument over continuation of existing rates. My opinion: We'd have been looking at 5%-6% unemployment nationwide and 3%-4% GDP or better in latter quarters if we'd had a tax-cutter in office.

[Kyle Ricky]

The envirofreaks do not let us make anything anymore.  It would be next to impossible to greenfield a factory of any sort now.  It might annoy a certain stinkbug.  That's why there are no jobs. 

Yes, the nutcase environmentalist who never left San Francisco have to have their say in things. Mostly, their say ruins things.

[Ballygrl]

democrat_patriot (2,314 posts)

"You've had your tax breaks for 10 years, where are the jobs?"

Simple question all Republicans need to answer.

The Democrats took over:

[JohnnyReb]

Well you DUmmies wouldn't do them so illegal aliens took them. ...and you know what, they did a better job for less money.

[jukin]

A big part of me says to just hike up the tax rate for ALL incomes. Let the lower income people have their rates doubled and see how happy they would be paying their fair share. Some things need to be experienced to be understood.

The dirty little secret is that without a huge hike on all income groups the deficit at the super high current spending levels will continue at a trillion dollars plus. For example in the three years that 0bama has implemented his reign of economic terror, the food stamps program has bone up $45 billion per year. The millionaires tax will bring in $4 billion/year. The tax for job creators will bring in about $20 billion not including how many people will lose their jobs and switch from producers to takers. In the end the job creator tax will lower overall tax revenues just like it does in every state that it has been tried in.

[Kyle Ricky]

I think if they would start making the welfare bums pay taxes, we would see a nice size of revenue come in.

[Ralph Wiggum]

I don't recall who floated this idea, many people probably. But rather than having FICA & other stuff deducted from your paycheck, if you had to write a check for that every pay period it might even make DUmmies into Republicans.

[JohnnyReb]

I don't recall who floated this idea, many people probably. But rather than having FICA & other stuff deducted from your paycheck, if you had to write a check for that every pay period it might even make DUmmies into Republicans.

I've been saying that for 40+ years.

The reason it isn't done that way is.....

1- The government knows that they wouldn't get much of their money that way.

2- Dummies would really revolt.

3- It makes to much sense and would cut out to many government/private jobs.

[Danglars]

A big part of me says to just hike up the tax rate for ALL incomes. Let the lower income people have their rates doubled and see how happy they would be paying their fair share. Some things need to be experienced to be understood.

The dirty little secret is that without a huge hike on all income groups the deficit at the super high current spending levels will continue at a trillion dollars plus. For example in the three years that 0bama has implemented his reign of economic terror, the food stamps program has bone up $45 billion per year. The millionaires tax will bring in $4 billion/year. The tax for job creators will bring in about $20 billion not including how many people will lose their jobs and switch from producers to takers. In the end the job creator tax will lower overall tax revenues just like it does in every state that it has been tried in.

How about cutting a tonload of non-defense spending first, before we raise taxes?

[jukin]

I don't recall who floated this idea, many people probably. But rather than having FICA & other stuff deducted from your paycheck, if you had to write a check for that every pay period it might even make DUmmies into Republicans.

The most evil tax form is Schedule SE, the Social Security and Medicare tax. 15.4% right off the top.

[thundley4]

How about cutting a tonload of non-defense spending first, before we raise taxes?

That might help, but would do almost nothing to pay down the debt.

[Happy Fun Ball]

Where are the jobs? Right here.

[Danglars]

That might help, but would do almost nothing to pay down the debt.

And increasing taxes would?

[thundley4]

And increasing taxes would?

Nope, it's going to take a combination of the two, and only an across the board tax increase would work.

[miskie]

Where are the jobs? Right here.

Yup -- I was busy posting the original  from The Examiner --

Voters in 17 states elected new Republican governors in November 2010. This new breed of fiscally-conservative, tea party-supported Republican governors took office in January 2011. Here is how those states have fared since then, in terms of their unemployment rates:

Code: [Select]

Kansas - 6.9% to 6.1% = a decline of 0.8%

Maine - 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Michigan - 10.9% to 8.5% = a decline of 2.4%

New Mexico - 7.7% to 6.7% = a decline of 1.0%

Oklahoma - 6.2% to 4.8% = a decline of 1.4%

Pennsylvania - 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Tennessee - 9.5% to 7.9% = a decline of 1.6%

Wisconsin - 7.7% to 6.8% = a decline of 0.9%

Wyoming - 6.3% to 5.2% = a decline of 1.1%

Alabama - 9.3% to 7.4% = a decline of 1.9%

Georgia - 10.1% to 8.9% = a decline of 1.2%

South Carolina - 10.6% to 9.1% = a decline of 1.5%

South Dakota - 5.0% to 4.3% = a decline of 0.7%

Florida - 10.9% to 8.6% = a decline of 2.3%

Nevada - 13.8% to 11.6% = a decline of 2.2%

Iowa - 6.1% to 5.1% = a decline of 1.0%

Ohio - 9.0% to 7.3% = a decline of 1.7%
Every single one of these 17 states has seen its unemployment rate decline since January 2011. Three of them have had unemployment drop by more than 2% (Michigan, Florida, and Nevada). The average drop in the unemployment rate in these states was 1.35%. For a comparison, in January 2011 the U.S. national unemployment rate stood at 9.1%. It is currently 8.2%, meaning that the national unemployment rate has declined by just 0.9% since then. Based on these percentages, it can be said that the job market in states with new Republican governors is improving a full 50% faster than the job market nationally.

Now let's look at the eight states that elected new Democratic governors in 2010. Just like their Republican counterparts, these new Democratic governors took office in January 2011. Here's how those states have fared since then, in terms of unemployment:

Code: [Select]

Colorado - 8.8% to 8.1% = a decline of 0.7%

New York - 8.2% to 8.6% = an increase of 0.4%

Oregon - 9.9% to 8.4% = a decline of 1.5%

California - 12.1% to 10.8% = a decline of 1.3%

Connecticut - 9.3% to 7.8% = a decline of 1.5%

Hawaii - 6.7% to 6.3% = a decline of 0.4%

Minnesota - 6.8% to 5.6% = a decline of 1.2%

Vermont - 6.0% to 4.6% = a decline of 1.4%
The average drop in the unemployment rate in these states was 0.95%, approximately the same as the drop seen nationally. It's interesting to note than one of these states (New York) has actually experienced an increase in its unemployment rate since January 2011.

Based on this data, it appears that the policies being implemented at the state level by newly elected Republican governors are having a positive impact in terms of job creation.

So, primitives - there's your jobs. What do you think about that ?

[Danglars]

Nope, it's going to take a combination of the two, and only an across the board tax increase would work.

Thundley, is the price of raising taxes to increase revenue a subtraction from the private ecomomy's growth in the inrease-taxes part of this? Because retarding the private macroeconomy isn't worth accelerated debt repayment.

Theoretically, couldn't we simply cut spending?

[diesel driver]

I've been saying that for 40+ years.

The reason it isn't done that way is.....

1- The government knows that they wouldn't get much of their money that way.

2- Dummies would really revolt.

3- It makes to much sense and would cut out to many government/private jobs.

4- There's not a damned one of the members of Congress with enough balls to try it, because it would mean an end to their cushy careers.

[BlueStateSaint]

2- Dummies would really revolt.

With what--spitballs?  Cheetos?

[freedumb2003]

A big part of me says to just hike up the tax rate for ALL incomes. Let the lower income people have their rates doubled and see how happy they would be paying their fair share. Some things need to be experienced to be understood. 

The bottom 50% don't PAY tax.  They get PAID tax (EIC).  What do they care if the tax rate doubles or triples?  Only when they get fired b/c their employer got taxed out of business would they even notice (except to cheer it on).

[thundley4]

Thundley, is the price of raising taxes to increase revenue a subtraction from the private ecomomy's growth in the inrease-taxes part of this? Because retarding the private macroeconomy isn't worth accelerated debt repayment.

Theoretically, couldn't we simply cut spending?

I should have clarified the "across the board".  Businesses should be exempted from increases, but personal income taxes will have to increase. Current spending on the military, Social Security and Medicare Takes almost everything that comes into the fed through taxes now.

[98ZJUSMC]

NNN0LHI (65,911 posts)

democrat_patriot (2,314 posts)

"You've had your tax breaks for 10 years, where are the jobs?"

Simple question all Republicans need to answer.

Allrighty then, I will.  Killed, by Congress, from 2006-2010.  Oh, wait....that was a Democrat Congress.

Sorry, DUllard.

[Aristotelian]

With what--spitballs?  Cheetos?

^5 for (potentially unintentional) reference to one of my favourite political speeches.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C58YAONY_hE