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.
In aggregate, the medium family income is the lowest it has been since the late 1980s. In September, more part-time jobs were added than full time jobs. Overall, the standard of living for the average American family has been in a slow decline during the last 20 years.
Obama said he wants jobs and growth and he wants to build from the middle class out. What exactly is the plan where the countries economy grows and jobs are created? For anyone hoping for a pay raise, how is Obama going to force companies to give them to you?
Obama's "jobs plan" is to tax the rich, punish success and blame his utter failures on everyone else. Why would the next 4 years be any different than the last 4?
This is what a real president that isn't self-aggrandizing would do, it's rare in U.S. political history...
Quote:
MILTON FRIEDMAN: Absolutely. I still am. But what Reagan’s role in that is not what is ordinarily thought. I think the most important role he played was being willing to standby while the measures were taken, the monetary measures were taken, which was necessary to break the inflation. I do not believe that there is any other president in my lifetime who would have stood by and supported the Federal Reserve in the policy of sharp deflation, which occurred from 1980 to 1982.
BEN WATTENBERG: This is Paul Volcker as the head of the Fed, right?
MILTON FRIEDMAN: Paul Volcker as the head of the Fed.
DANIEL YERGIN: And Volcker is saying, if we don’t deal with inflation, that our social fabric is going to snap, that terrible things can happen, and that, as painful as it is, if you didn’t bring it out of the system…
MILTON FRIEDMAN: And by 1981, you were in a very sharp recession. The poll results for Reagan were going down. But Reagan did not in any way try to pressure Volcker to change his course, because Reagan understood, despite what people say, Reagan really was a smart man, is a smart man, and Reagan knew that you had to slow down the rate of monetary growth and keep it slow if you were going to get out of the inflationary spiral. And, that worked. And, thanks to his willingness to take the heat when it was very, very intense, you came out of it in 1983, and started on the very rapid rise of the next …well, ever since.
It was called the Obam stimulus plan> didn't wortk that well it seems. he isn't gettig anymore money or nor has his aprty even introduced a bill on senate fllor for one.
Many economists believe the stimulus, watered down by repugs, wasn't big enough. This is old news.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake
Obama's "jobs plan" is to tax the rich, punish success and blame his utter failures on everyone else. Why would the next 4 years be any different than the last 4?
Gee, how many times are you going to repeat this canard. It's so worn out, yet you continue.
So here's what we do (you'll like this):
* Tax the wealthy at 50% for starters.
* Raise the capital gains rate to 50% for starters.
* Reduce taxes on the middle class to capital gains levels or below (a little payback here).
* Tax money in offshore shelters at 50% for starters.
* For corporations who pay zero taxes, tax them at 50% retroactively.
* Tax obstructionist congressional republicans at double their present rate (call it a "treachery tax").
I have his plan in my desk drawer, some democrat stuck in my mail box. His plan to create jobs for small businesses was to talk about his prior tax cuts, the expansion of 0bamaCare and proposing new middle class tax cuts. There you go, that will create many new jobs. But as far as i know, 0bama is not planning any new tax cuts, he is just going to continue the evil BOOOOOSH tax rates..... again.
The temporary payroll tax cut that was agreed to in 2011 will end; people will see less money in their paychecks. That will get attention. If we go off the fiscal cliff, taxes will soar and a recession will ensue: Obama will be the president that oversaw that disaster.
And resulted in the worst decade, perhaps since the end of the Great Depression.
Technically, that was Bush's plan when he signed off a legislation towards the effect in 2002. And of course, he also left the office with an unprecedented loss of private sector jobs already in progress. Not many decades can boast negative change in private sector employment.
So no, thank you.
We have a fifty year high in poverty, and a corresponding high in people on Food Stamps, did Boooosh cause that too, or has the historic increase in the poor and destitute occurred under obama's presidency?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Reagan took office while the economy had added 1.6 million jobs in the inherited fiscal year.
Obama took office while the economy had shed 6.5 million jobs in the inherited fiscal year (and 1.7 million before it).
But then, it might be too complicated for you, if not politically inconvenient. BTW, the first four fiscal years under Reagan saw an increase of 5.9 million private sector jobs (123K/month). Under first three+ fiscal years (37 months) under Obama, we have seen 4.3 million private sector jobs (116K/month).
Oh, how far the Obama fan-boys have fallen.
In 2008 you guys voted for the hope and change, the lofty promises of obama's policies creating an economic boom have been replaced with <meh> "whatever' <shrug>. It's amazing how quickly the obama voters have settled for less then mediocre. We gave him four freaking damn years, and we are worse off then when he was sworn in.
Adding 116,000 a month is less then the minimum during a thriving economy, much less at a time when we need a "recovery." We should be creating 300,000 jobs a month, and even that would be sluggish for a recovery.
Nonfarm private payrolls hit a post-recession low of 106.8 million that month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The figure currently stands at 111.3 million as of July.
While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date. The private jobs figure stood at 111 million in January 2009, the month Obama took office.
And total nonfarm payrolls, including government workers, are down from 133.6 million workers at the beginning of 2009 to 133.2 million in July 2012. There's been a net loss of nearly 1 million public-sector jobs since Obama took office, despite a surge in temporary hiring for the 2010 census. CNN Fact Check: About those 4.5 million jobs ... - CNN.com
Never said it was ONLY low paying jobs, but the majority have been. To *see* some facts, please refer the CNN link in post #36.
And you can believe this or not, your choice, I am not gloating over the numbers. I'm concerned over the numbers. I want Obama to bring us back to full employment and for everyone who wants a job to have a job and a good paying job at that. But, the numbers are what they are and I haven't seen a viable plan to change them from either side of the aisle.
Many economists believe the stimulus, watered down by repugs, wasn't big enough. This is old news.
Gee, how many times are you going to repeat this canard. It's so worn out, yet you continue.
So here's what we do (you'll like this):
* Tax the wealthy at 50% for starters.
* Raise the capital gains rate to 50% for starters.
* Reduce taxes on the middle class to capital gains levels or below (a little payback here).
* Tax money in offshore shelters at 50% for starters.
* For corporations who pay zero taxes, tax them at 50% retroactively.
* Tax obstructionist congressional republicans at double their present rate (call it a "treachery tax").
This makes more sense than any part of your post.
lol, so where does it trickle sideways to you? Or is it more money for the government to spend.
Looks like all those people losing their jobs don't have to worry about taxes anymore because guess what... they don't have an income anymore. They are no longer a part of the tax paying base instead they now take out of the system.
Reduce taxes for middle class? I don't hear a word that they are doing that. In fact Obama is willing to put you on the line to increase taxes.
439,000 filing first time jobless benefits last week the highest in 18 months (april 2011). Don't blame it on Sandy, NJ and NY will probably start filing next week.
So when does this "growing the economy from the middle class out" start?
439,000 filing first time jobless benefits last week the highest in 18 months (april 2011). Don't blame it on Sandy, NJ and NY will probably start filing next week.
So when does this "growing the economy from the middle class out" start?
Growing the economy via trickle down is a despicable lie to Americans. It alone is responsible for any lousy economy we have. For 30 years, the fascist wealthy have lined their own pockets at the expense of average Americans. The 1% feels overtaxed at 15% and wants it to be zero, with repugs on their side.
Here's some news for you: people are waking up, and gaining some wealthy allies - so hang on to your "perks" as best you can because they are going away. You may have to start punching the clock along with the "riffraff" you seem to despise. Think of that!
Those tax breaks and shelters are going to disappear - live with it.
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.
