Creating jobs 101 for dummies (Obama)

[RDD_1210]

Stupid post.

Do you want to increase employment? Here's how:

Increase consumer demand by increasing median disposable incomes.
(Problem solved.)

This about sums it up </thread>

No, no it doesn't..And neither does you cheap attempt at deflection from the broader economic concept, by trying to make the issue about me.

Sorry your strawman was debunked so quickly. Want to try again with a situation that is based in reality?

 

[occupied]

Quote from Jobs act of 2011:

First, the American Jobs Act of 2011 provides a tax cut
for small businesses, to help them hire and expand now, and an
additional tax cut to any business that hires or increases
wages. In addition, the American Jobs Act of 2011 puts more
money in the pockets of working and middle class Americans by
cutting in half the payroll tax that comes out of the paycheck
of every worker, saving typical families an average of $1,500 a
year.


Bet you hated the idea at the time.

Because Obama wasn't smart enough to submit the bill clean. He watered it down with all other nature of bullshit

The bill was never submitted or subjected to the amendment process for obvious reasons, quit pulling rationales for a needlessly hostile congress out of your ass. it was a clean bill and better yet, deficit neutral, no reason not to even consider it except just to thumb their noses at the president.

 

[Oddball]

Quote from Jobs act of 2011:

First, the American Jobs Act of 2011 provides a tax cut
for small businesses, to help them hire and expand now, and an
additional tax cut to any business that hires or increases
wages. In addition, the American Jobs Act of 2011 puts more
money in the pockets of working and middle class Americans by
cutting in half the payroll tax that comes out of the paycheck
of every worker, saving typical families an average of $1,500 a
year.


Bet you hated the idea at the time.

You really don't know shit about shit, do you?

No employer hires new people just to get a measly tax break from doing so....They hire more in anticipation of producing more.

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

 

[Oddball]

This about sums it up </thread>

No, no it doesn't..And neither does you cheap attempt at deflection from the broader economic concept, by trying to make the issue about me.

Sorry your strawman was debunked so quickly. Want to try again with a situation that is based in reality?

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

 

[occupied]

You really don't know shit about shit, do you?

No employer hires new people just to get a measly tax break from doing so....They hire more in anticipation of producing more.

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

Might I direct your attention to post number 5 in this thread, I know what stimulates jobs, read before you attack next time.

 

[Oddball]

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

Might I direct your attention to post number 5 in this thread, I know what stimulates jobs, read before you attack next time.

You don't know your ass form a hole in the ground....Post 5 merely further demonstrates that.

 

[occupied]

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

Might I direct your attention to post number 5 in this thread, I know what stimulates jobs, read before you attack next time.

You don't know your ass form a hole in the ground....Post 5 merely further demonstrates that.

Full of shit as usual, say how it's wrong or STFU.

 

[RDD_1210]

No, no it doesn't..And neither does you cheap attempt at deflection from the broader economic concept, by trying to make the issue about me.

Sorry your strawman was debunked so quickly. Want to try again with a situation that is based in reality?

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You really don't know shit about shit, do you?

No employer hires new people just to get a measly tax break from doing so....They hire more in anticipation of producing more.

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

I take offense to your remarks. It was sneered at because it was a tax credit gimmick. What I suggested is a lowering of the overall tax rate which would far exceed a thousand bucks and if not taken advantage of would cost nothing. Obama's proposal was a one time gimmick for pocket change.

 

[Oddball]

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

I take offense to your remarks. It was sneered at because it was a tax credit gimmick.

That's basically what I said...What's to take offense of?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Sorry your strawman was debunked so quickly. Want to try again with a situation that is based in reality?

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

The demand for goods first requires that you have a fucking job.

 

[Mr Natural]

After 30 some of years of some of ther lowest tax rates in our history, one would think we'd be up to our asses in jobs by now.

 

[Oddball]

Sorry your strawman was debunked so quickly. Want to try again with a situation that is based in reality?

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

Not at all...I made a general economic example and you tried to make it all about me...Typical liberoidal deflection technique to avoid the overall concept being discussed, because you'd get your ass kicked if you did.

And you're not at all good at it to boot.

 

[occupied]

Not saying I necessarily agreed with it but the OP suggests pretty much the same thing proposed by Obama and the democrats last year and sneered at by the republicans.

And it was sneered at for exactly the reason I told you...Employers don't hire people that cost them tens of thousands of dollars to hire, only to get a tax break of a thousand or two.

Only a brain dead nitwit who knows nothing about business could float such a stupid idea and claim it as serious, or believe that the person proposing such an absurdity is serious.

I take offense to your remarks. It was sneered at because it was a tax credit gimmick. What I suggested is a lowering of the overall tax rate which would far exceed a thousand bucks and if not taken advantage of would cost nothing. Obama's proposal was a one time gimmick for pocket change.

Pretty much the same idea though, using the tax code as stimulus, a very republican idea that they rejected out of hand without consideration.

 

[Oddball]

After 30 some of years of some of ther lowest tax rates in our history, one would think we'd be up to our asses in jobs by now.

Non sequitur.

The current economic/unemployment problems were caused by the housing bubble, not tax rates.

 

[Freemason9]

Stupid post.

Do you want to increase employment? Here's how:

Increase consumer demand by increasing median disposable incomes.
(Problem solved.)

You seem pretty smart - so please tell me what the president's plan is. Don't skip the details.

Better yet, let's go through this together--step by step.

(1) There is a fixed, measurable amount of wealth in the U.S. at any given moment.
(2) That wealth is distributed according to (a) birthright, (b) incomes, (c) circumstance/geography, (d) and tax policy. It is beyond dispute that U.S. wealth is increasingly concentrated into the hands of a very few.
(3) It would seem wise that wealth should be distributed in a less concentrated manner--depending, of course, upon individual labor and effort (and need for the infirm, the elderly, and the grossly incompetent).

Do you agree with this so far?

 

[RDD_1210]

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

The demand for goods first requires that you have a fucking job.

And what better way to create jobs then to cut taxes for people who already have money.

 

[RDD_1210]

My "straw man" was a generality, not literal....The economic concept still stands, your flimsy attempt at derailing notwithstanding.

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

Not at all...I made a general economic example and you tried to make it all about me...Typical liberoidal deflection technique to avoid the overall concept being discussed, because you'd get your ass kicked if you did.

And you're not at all good at it to boot.

Weird, when someone uses the word "my" I assume they are referring to themselves. Don't know how I could have made that crazy conclusion.

 

[Oddball]

Oh, STFU and move along, troll.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Move those goal posts.

The purchasing power of the job creators (middle class) would not be hit with tax hikes. Happy?

The demand for goods first requires that you have a fucking job.

And what better way to create jobs then to cut taxes for people who already have money.

Its not a cut. Its the current rate. And its their fucking money to begin with.