Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The country began on a path of job growth after World War II. The eight years of the Truman administration saw jobs increase by 6.6% by adding 2.7 million jobs. This trend of net new jobs continued from 1945 until 2001. A total of 101.5 million net new jobs were added in this period for an increase of 242% or an average of 4.3% per year.
The administration of President G.W. Bush broke that trend. During the 8 years of his administration, almost no net new jobs were created. Therefore, between 1945 and 2009 102.9 million new jobs were added or increase of 245%. During that period, population grew 168 million or 120%.
There is a lot of rhetoric about jobs. The Republican approach is tax cuts, the Democratic approach is tax increases coupled with moderate spending cuts. History seems to favor the Democratic approach.
The country began on a path of job growth after World War II. The eight years of the Truman administration saw jobs increase by 6.6% by adding 2.7 million jobs. This trend of net new jobs continued from 1945 until 2001. A total of 101.5 million net new jobs were added in this period for an increase of 242% or an average of 4.3% per year.
The administration of President G.W. Bush broke that trend. During the 8 years of his administration, almost no net new jobs were created. Therefore, between 1945 and 2009 102.9 million new jobs were added or increase of 245%. During that period, population grew 168 million or 120%.
There is a lot of rhetoric about jobs. The Republican approach is tax cuts, the Democratic approach is tax increases coupled with moderate spending cuts. History seems to favor the Democratic approach.
Don't fall for the Republican talking point that Democrats only support tax increases. They support targeted tax cuts and credits on certain expenses for most Americans. They just want to increase the top marginal income tax rate a small amount to help reduce the deficit.
Don't fall for the Republican talking point that Democrats only support tax increases. They support targeted tax cuts and credits on certain expenses for most Americans. They just want to increase the top marginal income tax rate a small amount to help reduce the deficit.
It is impossible to tax a country into prosperity.
This trend of net new jobs continued from 1945 until 2001.
Thats when NAFTA was destroyed (post 2001) and outsourcing to third world countries was more advantagous tax wise than building up Mexico (NAFTA) was. Corporate tax cuts and numerous tax incentives allowed for 100,000's of jobs to be outsourced. I can drive through many corporate campuses and find 99% empty parking lots, but the corporate logo is still in the buildings because they pay no property taxes for the next 20 years. I know of numerous buildings where the employees work at the site but work indirectly for the corporation (they were all fired and then some were re-hired for the same exact positions by an outsource company at 1/3rd paycuts) and since they still have bodies in their buildings, the corporation gets its tax incentives at a profit.
The country began on a path of job growth after World War II. The eight years of the Truman administration saw jobs increase by 6.6% by adding 2.7 million jobs. This trend of net new jobs continued from 1945 until 2001. A total of 101.5 million net new jobs were added in this period for an increase of 242% or an average of 4.3% per year.
The administration of President G.W. Bush broke that trend. During the 8 years of his administration, almost no net new jobs were created. Therefore, between 1945 and 2009 102.9 million new jobs were added or increase of 245%. During that period, population grew 168 million or 120%.
There is a lot of rhetoric about jobs. The Republican approach is tax cuts, the Democratic approach is tax increases coupled with moderate spending cuts. History seems to favor the Democratic approach.
Thats when NAFTA was destroyed (post 2001) and outsourcing to third world countries was more advantagous tax wise than building up Mexico (NAFTA) was. Corporate tax cuts and numerous tax incentives allowed for 100,000's of jobs to be outsourced. I can drive through many corporate campuses and find 99% empty parking lots, but the corporate logo is still in the buildings because they pay no property taxes for the next 20 years. I know of numerous buildings where the employees work at the site but work indirectly for the corporation (they were all fired and then some were re-hired for the same exact positions by an outsource company at 1/3rd paycuts) and since they still have bodies in their buildings, the corporation gets its tax incentives at a profit.
Is this the latest propaganda being taught in public schools now?
On Monday President Clinton announced an "all-out" campaign to lobby Congress to pass permanent most-favored-nation status for China. The lobbying will be rough, with a fully mobilized American business community working as the iron fist inside the administration's velvet glove. The same day Clinton kicked off his new campaign, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue warned, on cue, that members of Congress who oppose permanent trade status for China "will find themselves in an unhappy situation with the business community."
The country began on a path of job growth after World War II. The eight years of the Truman administration saw jobs increase by 6.6% by adding 2.7 million jobs. This trend of net new jobs continued from 1945 until 2001. A total of 101.5 million net new jobs were added in this period for an increase of 242% or an average of 4.3% per year.
Haha, you couldnt even find the errors with your own posting, and you need others to point them out for you.
From 1945 unti 2001 is 1.81M jobs per year on average, and most of the creations took place during Republican led tax cuts, like Reagan, or the GOP led Congress under Clinton..
After the Bush tax cuts, jobs created per year were greater than that, until Democrats took over Congress..
And in Bush delt with 2 recessions, the first one during his first year of administration, and we keep hearing from Democrats that presidents arent responsible for what happens during their first few years in office.
Why do liberals consistantly ignore the fact that during most of Bushs terms, other than the 2 recessions we had, unemployment was around 5% and considered maximum employment? To distract from the current administration and because you cant do math?
It is impossible to tax a country into prosperity.
No one said that tax increases would.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
