Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-27-2011, 10:03 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,537,521 times
Reputation: 24590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrew.mensch View Post
Bush tax cuts to spur hiring didn't work - AND WERE NOT FUNDED
Medicare Part D giveaway - NOT FUNDED
Iraq War - NOT FUNDED
Afghanistan War - NOT FUNDED

I was saying that you should at least be honest - the GOP have hardly been spent-thrifts...
what do 3 of the 4 things you posted have to do with cutting taxes in order to increase hiring? how are you so sure they didnt work? unemployment under bush was about half of what it is now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-27-2011, 10:56 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,353,711 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
what do 3 of the 4 things you posted have to do with cutting taxes in order to increase hiring? how are you so sure they didnt work? unemployment under bush was about half of what it is now.
oh, except of course towards the end of his presidency...minor details.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2011, 11:00 AM
 
Location: NJ
17,574 posts, read 46,030,185 times
Reputation: 16271
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
true, but it's gotten more competitive recently I think.
Anytime the economy is bad it gets more competitive. When everything is humming along and there are no worries companies aren't pinching pennies. Once things start going bad companies start caring a lot more about the expenses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2011, 11:19 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,353,711 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
Anytime the economy is bad it gets more competitive. When everything is humming along and there are no worries companies aren't pinching pennies. Once things start going bad companies start caring a lot more about the expenses.
true, but by recently, i meant more like the past decade. many states have been agressively trying to attract all sorts of companies. lots of land, lots of reasons, it only makes sense. hmmm...on second thought, maybe we shouldn't retain them, and maybe some people will leave NJ! hehe
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2011, 06:40 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,537,521 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
oh, except of course towards the end of his presidency...minor details.
that could be blamed on the burst of the housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis. but then the housing bubble can be blamed for low unemployment. either way, i dont think its equal to me using an obama example of saying how many jobs would be created if we pass x bill. it probably would have been more appropriate to say that bush said the same thing when he passed his stimulus package (i assume he probably said something dumb like that also). i only chose obama because he is running the current administration and they say that garbage when they want to spend insane amounts of our money. i dont give bush a pass on it. bush started it. then obama poured gasoline on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2011, 08:40 PM
 
3,984 posts, read 7,057,362 times
Reputation: 2889
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
that could be blamed on the burst of the housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis. but then the housing bubble can be blamed for low unemployment. either way, i dont think its equal to me using an obama example of saying how many jobs would be created if we pass x bill. it probably would have been more appropriate to say that bush said the same thing when he passed his stimulus package (i assume he probably said something dumb like that also). i only chose obama because he is running the current administration and they say that garbage when they want to spend insane amounts of our money. i dont give bush a pass on it. bush started it. then obama poured gasoline on it.
The reality is TOTALLY the opposite. More like Bush-the-MBA-President's blindness to the creation of the mortgage mess ("the ownership society, heh-heh") set the country on fire and he handed Obama a garden hose to put it out with. Obama owns the economy now for better or mostly worse. But the scale of the 2008 downturn was much worse than anyone in power would admit.

Are there any rules that says Goya has to stick around for ___ number of years or can they take off to Alabama in 2 years?

Remember this "landmark" case of corporate suckitude?

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1] was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan which promised 3,169 new jobs and $1.2 million a year in tax revenues. The Court held in a 5–4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

The city eventually agreed to move Susette Kelo's house to a new location and to pay substantial additional compensation to other homeowners. The redeveloper was unable to obtain financing and abandoned the redevelopment project, leaving the land as an empty lot,[2] which was eventually turned into a dump by the city
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2011, 09:13 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,353,711 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
that could be blamed on the burst of the housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis. but then the housing bubble can be blamed for low unemployment. either way, i dont think its equal to me using an obama example of saying how many jobs would be created if we pass x bill. it probably would have been more appropriate to say that bush said the same thing when he passed his stimulus package (i assume he probably said something dumb like that also). i only chose obama because he is running the current administration and they say that garbage when they want to spend insane amounts of our money. i dont give bush a pass on it. bush started it. then obama poured gasoline on it.
well, obama said how many jobs would be created if we pass x, and bush said what would happen if we cut taxes. why not just agree that both sides spew b.s. to get their bills passed? that was the person's point when he quoted your statement.

the difference though is, obama is using independant review of his plan, and the results they came up with, to indicate how many jobs they estimate would be created. tax cuts you can only really guestimate what people will do with it. if i give you $1,000 extra this year, you may save it, you may pay down debt, you may invest it, you may go on a shopping spree at macy's. but if i have a bill that says i'm going to spend $20B on building bridges...you have to spend it on building bridges. It's a pretty basic thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2011, 10:11 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,537,521 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
but if i have a bill that says i'm going to spend $20B on building bridges...you have to spend it on building bridges. It's a pretty basic thing.
thats a scary thought process. the problem with this and any other stimulus by both bush and obama is once x dollars is spent, the jobs are gone and you are now x dollars in additional debt with no long term benefit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2011, 10:16 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,353,711 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
thats a scary thought process. the problem with this and any other stimulus by both bush and obama is once x dollars is spent, the jobs are gone and you are now x dollars in additional debt with no long term benefit.
well, if you focus stimulus dollars spent on infrastructure improvements that need to be done anyways, then you do have long term benefit. so, say you know 100 bridges need to be replaced in the next decade or so. If you can come up with a plan to accelerate that process, you've helped stimulate the economy in the short term, helped make infrastructure improvements that needed to happen anyways, but made them happen faster, and you now don't have to spend that 10 years from now.

fact is, sometimes the government does have to spend money. so if they need to spend it sooner than later, that's good for stimulus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2011, 10:44 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,537,521 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
well, if you focus stimulus dollars spent on infrastructure improvements that need to be done anyways, then you do have long term benefit. so, say you know 100 bridges need to be replaced in the next decade or so. If you can come up with a plan to accelerate that process, you've helped stimulate the economy in the short term, helped make infrastructure improvements that needed to happen anyways, but made them happen faster, and you now don't have to spend that 10 years from now.

fact is, sometimes the government does have to spend money. so if they need to spend it sooner than later, that's good for stimulus.
the problem is that it doesnt really stimulate anything. it just kicks the can down the road in the hopes something else will solve the problem by the time the money runs out. instead, they are better off not using the money and being more careful about what really needs to be done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top