Finally the Republican plan for jobs - Revealed.

[Liberty]

This downhill cycle began when a President decided to launch two wars on the back of a tax cut, predominately for the wealthy. Never before in the history of the United States had that happened.

Goes to show you, never elect a recovering alcoholic to the Presidency.

The more I read about Bush..the less I think he was involved in decision making or policy. It was pretty much a Cheney Presidency...with the PNAC as his cabinet.

Just like Obama is an Ayers/Soros/Trumka puppet with antisemitic communists for a cabinet, right?

 

[Trajan]

This downhill cycle began when a President decided to launch two wars on the back of a tax cut, predominately for the wealthy. Never before in the history of the United States had that happened.

Goes to show you, never elect a recovering alcoholic to the Presidency.

The more I read about Bush..the less I think he was involved in decision making or policy. It was pretty much a Cheney Presidency...with the PNAC as his cabinet.

like Rice ( not condaleeza) Samantha Powers and hillary talked Obama into libya?

 

[uscitizen]

http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/JEC_Jobs_Study.pdf

Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy
March 15, 2011

Yep real growth.
But we have to learn to live with less to spend. It is the inevitable result of competing in the global marketplace. Good for the top few percent but the rest of us make less.

Flat wages and CEO pay up 28%

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

Perhaps your view is a bit too limited in both breadth and distance.

 

[Seawytch]

Well yeah..

And I sort of don't get it with people in lower economic brackets going republican. All I could come up is the sort of Stockholm syndrome, Corporate Quisling thing.

But high flyers I get. I've sat in the meetings. And to a certain extent..I understand the point of view. They are sort of far removed from ordinary life, not really all that political and look at the whole thing as a numbers game. People are "heads" and reducing head count, in this day and age, is a way to secure profit.

I was chilling with a friend of mine last night, a former Lehman employee and now working with Barclay..who was perplexed that Lehman never suffered and Enron sort of review. He said they were doing very much the same thing in terms of accounting. Which kind of turned on a light bulb. Perhaps thats the reason they were "allowed" to fail.

I don't get it either, but that's what happens when you have rich people paying Fox to tell middle class people it is the poor people's fault.

The corporations ONLY care about their bottom line and Republicans (and some Democrats) only care about catering to the corporations that are paying them. How can it be made any clearer than rolling back laws that prevent corporations from poisoning us?

H.R. 872, which “will amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act to clarify Congressional intent and eliminate the requirement for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits for applications of pesticides approved for use under FIFRA.”
{Translated: The measure would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from requiring farmers or companies to comply with the Clean Water Act when using pesticides on or near water sources.}

How can it be made any clearer than BPs Three Little Piggies Memo?

 

[Trajan]

Yep real growth.
But we have to learn to live with less to spend. It is the inevitable result of competing in the global marketplace. Good for the top few percent but the rest of us make less.

Flat wages and CEO pay up 28%

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

Perhaps your view is a bit too limited in both breadth and distance.

how so?

 

[Sallow]

http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/JEC_Jobs_Study.pdf

Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy
March 15, 2011

Yep real growth.
But we have to learn to live with less to spend. It is the inevitable result of competing in the global marketplace. Good for the top few percent but the rest of us make less.

Flat wages and CEO pay up 28%

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

I like this whole talk of government "downsizing". It basically reflects that people have gotten very comfortable with the services the government provides...until they are not provided anymore. The last NYC snowstorm illustrated that very nicely.

I mean do we really want to go back to cities with high crime, fires that would knock out blocks of apartments, epidemics, filth, illiteracy, tainted food and water and robber barons?

Fun as it was..it does get old.

 

[Sallow]

This downhill cycle began when a President decided to launch two wars on the back of a tax cut, predominately for the wealthy. Never before in the history of the United States had that happened.

Goes to show you, never elect a recovering alcoholic to the Presidency.

The more I read about Bush..the less I think he was involved in decision making or policy. It was pretty much a Cheney Presidency...with the PNAC as his cabinet.

like rice slaughter and hillary talked Obama into libya?

Obama's very much his own man. I don't discount Bush at all..he was very clever and good at campaigning. But I don't think he really wanted to be bothered with the Presidency. It was only in the last few years, when Poppa Bush sent in the A-team, that he was more hands on.

 

[NYcarbineer]

IT IS NOT the GOVERNMENT'S JOB TO CREATE JOBS.

Why is this so hard for you idiot commie libs to understand?
Let the market do it's job, STOP FUCKING TINKERING WITH IT.

The 'market' wants the least amount of labor cost (jobs) possible for the most amount of production. The 'market' wants nothing built in the US at 20 dollars an hour if it can be built in China for 30 cents an hour. The 'market' wants labor as cheap and as punishing as the human condition will allow.

You may find merit in all that, but don't try to claim that the 'market' is labor's best friend.

 

[uscitizen]

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

Perhaps your view is a bit too limited in both breadth and distance.

how so?

The inevitable result of globalization is loss of jobs to overseas and a lowered standard of living in the USA for the vast majority of people. Increasing productivity means working harder for the same or less wages and or layoffs or offshoring. All good for the haves but not so good for the vast majority of Americans.
The upper crust will keep growing the distance from the masses though.

This is the inevitable result of let the market prevail.
And of course we need to remove corporate welfare as well.
Like the bill to pay people with tax dollars to leave their repossesed house in good order.
Nothing but corporate welfare to increase the selling price for the bank and reduce their fix up costs.

Lets have a pure flat personal income tax on ALL personal income with NO deductions at all.

 

[uscitizen]

The more I read about Bush..the less I think he was involved in decision making or policy. It was pretty much a Cheney Presidency...with the PNAC as his cabinet.

like rice slaughter and hillary talked Obama into libya?

Obama's very much his own man. I don't discount Bush at all..he was very clever and good at campaigning. But I don't think he really wanted to be bothered with the Presidency. It was only in the last few years, when Poppa Bush sent in the A-team, that he was more hands on.

I have to disagree, Obama is controlled by the same big money/power interests as Bush was on economic issues.
I did nope that Obama had balls enough to be his own man. But in anycase it would have been useless any since congress is all bought/rented by big money anyway.

 

[Trajan]

Yep real growth.
But we have to learn to live with less to spend. It is the inevitable result of competing in the global marketplace. Good for the top few percent but the rest of us make less.

Flat wages and CEO pay up 28%

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

I like this whole talk of government "downsizing". It basically reflects that people have gotten very comfortable with the services the government provides...until they are not provided anymore.

sorry no sale, when you spend way ahead of inflation and pop. growth sans some catastrophic requirement you raise expectations beyond the bar at which it is monetarily feasible to provide and yes people get used to the raised bar and whine when the bar is leveled down to its appropriate place.

you cannot provide everything to everyone...no matter how hard you try but try they do and here we are.

The last NYC snowstorm illustrated that very nicely.

are you claiming that the apparently botched clean up was do to downsizing? In that they did not have enough or there was a shortage of personnel and resources?

I mean do we really want to go back to cities with high crime, fires that would knock out blocks of apartments, epidemics, filth, illiteracy, tainted food and water and robber barons?

Fun as it was..it does get old.

hyperbole clean up on aisle 5 Irv....bring the ubersized broom and dustpan.

 

[Trajan]

Perhaps your view is a bit too limited in both breadth and distance.

how so?

The inevitable result of globalization is loss of jobs to overseas and a lowered standard of living in the USA for the vast majority of people. Increasing productivity means working harder for the same or less wages and or layoffs or offshoring. All good for the haves but not so good for the vast majority of Americans.
The upper crust will keep growing the distance from the masses though.

This is the inevitable result of let the market prevail.
And of course we need to remove corporate welfare as well.
Like the bill to pay people with tax dollars to leave their repossesed house in good order.
Nothing but corporate welfare to increase the selling price for the bank and reduce their fix up costs.

Lets have a pure flat personal income tax on ALL personal income with NO deductions at all.

fine by me.

 

[uscitizen]

The golden age of America is past folks, it is downhill from there for at least 20-30 years.
The only question is how far downhill we go.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't see a thing about a plan in there....

Um..



If you want to play the "Obtuse link game", fine.

But I for one, know you are smarter then that.

no, thats not how it works I asked for the plan, so I can read it, you made the thread you are speaking to it, but? wheres the beef? I don't even know where that quote you made there comes from and its not up to me to search for links or information to back up YOUR debate.

But I for one, know you are smarter then that.

sorry, no sale.

You need a link to the common knowledge that the Republican agenda (at least the one they profess) is centered around massive cuts in government spending at all levels of government?

lol

 

[uscitizen]

how so?

The inevitable result of globalization is loss of jobs to overseas and a lowered standard of living in the USA for the vast majority of people. Increasing productivity means working harder for the same or less wages and or layoffs or offshoring. All good for the haves but not so good for the vast majority of Americans.
The upper crust will keep growing the distance from the masses though.

This is the inevitable result of let the market prevail.
And of course we need to remove corporate welfare as well.
Like the bill to pay people with tax dollars to leave their repossesed house in good order.
Nothing but corporate welfare to increase the selling price for the bank and reduce their fix up costs.

Lets have a pure flat personal income tax on ALL personal income with NO deductions at all.

fine by me.

it is not fine by me, however i see it as inevitable and resistance is futile in the short term, and short term is the only way America has functioned for at least 30 years.

All we can do as individuals is to tighten up and hunker down to weather the leaner times ahead for most of us.

 

[edthecynic]

hey I thought happy days were her again. jobs being 'created' etc. wages are always a lagging indicator, no? the ceos are 'creating' jobs its says so in the other celebratory post on the 216k jobs last month, so ? they are squeezing more productivity out of who they have and are gingerly adding jobs, the market is up obama says that a good thing because earnings or that is revenue appears to be rising...so? ceos run the shop, they are 'creating' jobs, and?



of course according to some gov workers losing their jobs as the gov. downsizes, which they should have done 2 years ago like the private industry did, is a bad thing, well its also a bad thing because we borrowed money to pay for these jobs to keep them afloat ( and pay interest on that money going forward, but that doesn't have an effect on anything right? ) and now that that string has run out whoooooops, we need another stimulus which will not be forth coming, to save them all over again.....

Perhaps your view is a bit too limited in both breadth and distance.

how so?

Interesting how you expect an explanation from others but refuse to provide one yourself when asked!!!!

Talk about comprehension, I quoted and highlighted what you said, as well as provided the link to the report, in an earlier post, that you were too lazy to google and read before you attacked the commentary as questionable.

no, you read only what you wanted to an accented what you wanted to, see, comprehension doesn't stop at what nits you want to pick....

If that were true you would have freely highlighted what you think I missed, just like you demanded a link be provided for yourself.

I also find it very interesting that you are no longer questioning the commentary in the OP now that you have access to the GOP report, but instead are off on this tangent!!!!
Very revealing!

 

[Sallow]

like rice slaughter and hillary talked Obama into libya?

Obama's very much his own man. I don't discount Bush at all..he was very clever and good at campaigning. But I don't think he really wanted to be bothered with the Presidency. It was only in the last few years, when Poppa Bush sent in the A-team, that he was more hands on.

I have to disagree, Obama is controlled by the same big money/power interests as Bush was on economic issues.
I did nope that Obama had balls enough to be his own man. But in anycase it would have been useless any since congress is all bought/rented by big money anyway.

There's the poetry of campaigning and the prose of governing coming at ya.

President Obama, in terms of ground breaking legislation, has been one of the most successful Presidents in recent history. But given the nature of our present system, and it's collusion with private industry..that comes with a price.

Is President Obama a "tool"? Sure. As much a "tool" as Clinton was. But they make "baby" steps toward economic parity for the displaced. Neither were or are an FDR..but it's a heck of a lot better then say Reagan or GW Bush in that regard.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The mathematical reality is that the GOP agenda is to eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs by taking away the funding that sustains those jobs.

They are not just government jobs. They are private sector jobs as well.

No elimination of government funding can occur without job elimination.

This reality is of course why the GOP is generally so mealy mouthed about the whole issue...

...they don't dare run on the simple truth, which is that in order to balance the budget without any tax increases,

you HAVE to put hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work.

 

[Trajan]

The golden age of America is past folks, it is downhill from there for at least 20-30 years.
The only question is how far downhill we go.

no, I am not sure of that; china despite its vaunted industrial capacity purely in the manufacturing sector has issues, they have social issues that will in say, oh, 15 years max, push all encompassing public health issues hand in hand with pop. issues, India will swing up and all that aside, there is a war coming.
A big one and it will if it worked out like that last big one, level playing most fields again and provide the usual respite and advantage it bestows upon the winners whose industrial base stays relatively intact and whose infrastructure survives best.

 

[uscitizen]

Obama's very much his own man. I don't discount Bush at all..he was very clever and good at campaigning. But I don't think he really wanted to be bothered with the Presidency. It was only in the last few years, when Poppa Bush sent in the A-team, that he was more hands on.

I have to disagree, Obama is controlled by the same big money/power interests as Bush was on economic issues.
I did nope that Obama had balls enough to be his own man. But in anycase it would have been useless any since congress is all bought/rented by big money anyway.

There's the poetry of campaigning and the prose of governing coming at ya.

President Obama, in terms of ground breaking legislation, has been one of the most successful Presidents in recent history. But given the nature of our present system, and it's collusion with private industry..that comes with a price.

Is President Obama a "tool"? Sure. As much a "tool" as Clinton was. But they make "baby" steps toward economic parity for the displaced. Neither were or are an FDR..but it's a heck of a lot better then say Reagan or GW Bush in that regard.

Reagan was actually better at that than either Bush. But his was a very deceptice presidency. Tax cuts that were actually increases, etc