Soooooo why was this shot down?

[Claudette]

The Chamber of Commerce doesn't like it either.

In a letter to senators this week, the Chamber of Commerce called the bill "misguided" and said it "would hamper American worldwide companies' competitiveness, increase complexity in the Internal Revenue Code, and threaten economic growth."

 

[Seawytch]

What does the GOP have against incentives that would bring jobs to our country?

As it stands NOW, we actually give incentives FOR outsourcing. This bill would have ended that and given breaks to companies that moved back here.

Someone PLEASE explain why the GOP would oppose such a bill.

 

[kaz]

Can someone please give me an honest answer about what is wrong with this legislation and why it wasn't even allowed to come to a vote?

Government manipulating markets is not good for jobs. When you throw a stone in a pond, the stone doesn't just splash, but there are ripples. As an overall economy, we do the best when we are most efficient. Companies offshoring to cut cost means they produce more for less. That money then flows to new projects, shareholders, etc. By keeping business units artificially onshore, it may help those specific people, but it hurts the overall economy and costs net jobs, it doesn't create them.

And it's actually even worse then that because while the government incents companies to say onshore they punish them with regulations and taxes. Jobs are created by profit. Low, flat, simple taxes create the most wealth and opportunity for everyone. Like it or not, all of economics proves that.

 

[rdean]

Dollar to a dog turd Reid loaded it down with a bunch of poison pill amendments, so lolberal bedwetters could mewl about "republican obstructionism".

Double-dealing weasel fuckchops are like that.

So you can prove that or you just blowing shit outa fat mouth?

 

[kaz]

Dollar to a dog turd Reid loaded it down with a bunch of poison pill amendments, so lolberal bedwetters could mewl about "republican obstructionism".

Double-dealing weasel fuckchops are like that.

So you can prove that or you just blowing shit outa fat mouth?

If he can prove it, would it matter? Would you call Reid a boob and oppose the bill?

If not, why should anyone bother proving it to you?

 

[Conservative]

What does the GOP have against incentives that would bring jobs to our country?

As it stands NOW, we actually give incentives FOR outsourcing. This bill would have ended that and given breaks to companies that moved back here.

Someone PLEASE explain why the GOP would oppose such a bill.

please see my previous post. It also takes away existing credits to replace them with these. How do you know which is better?

 

[Conservative]

Dollar to a dog turd Reid loaded it down with a bunch of poison pill amendments, so lolberal bedwetters could mewl about "republican obstructionism".

Double-dealing weasel fuckchops are like that.

So you can prove that or you just blowing shit outa fat mouth?

No one can prove what the 8 GOP and 3 Dem amendments were, either way. As they were not allowed a vote, there is no record of them. See previous post.

 

[Seawytch]

Can someone please give me an honest answer about what is wrong with this legislation and why it wasn't even allowed to come to a vote?

Government manipulating markets is not good for jobs. When you throw a stone in a pond, the stone doesn't just splash, but there are ripples. As an overall economy, we do the best when we are most efficient. Companies offshoring to cut cost means they produce more for less. That money then flows to new projects, shareholders, etc. By keeping business units artificially onshore, it may help those specific people, but it hurts the overall economy and costs net jobs, it doesn't create them.

And it's actually even worse then that because while the government incents companies to say onshore they punish them with regulations and taxes. Jobs are created by profit. Low, flat, simple taxes create the most wealth and opportunity for everyone. Like it or not, all of economics proves that.

How is stopping incentives for outsourcing and giving incentives to insource "manipulating the market"? Isn't giving the incentives to outsource "manipulating the market" then?

 

[RDD_1210]

Can someone please give me an honest answer about what is wrong with this legislation and why it wasn't even allowed to come to a vote?

GOP senators block top Obama jobs initiative - CNN.com

This looks to be a good bill to promote bringing back jobs, private business jobs, to American soil. But the majority of the GOP in the senate blocked it from even being allowed to be voted on. Why?

This screams of partisan politics and again placing priority on blocking anything that the president does as priority #1 even when it comes at the cost of creating American jobs.

So, can someone please explain it to me.

and the 20 or so jobs bills Reid is sitting on.. that isn't partisan? Where's your fauxrage there???

Such as?

 

[Seawytch]

What does the GOP have against incentives that would bring jobs to our country?

As it stands NOW, we actually give incentives FOR outsourcing. This bill would have ended that and given breaks to companies that moved back here.

Someone PLEASE explain why the GOP would oppose such a bill.

please see my previous post. It also takes away existing credits to replace them with these. How do you know which is better?

How do we know which one is better? Let's see....incentives to ship jobs overseas or incentives to bring jobs to the U.S. Which one could possibly be "better"... gee, I wonder. Really?

 

[Conservative]

Can someone please give me an honest answer about what is wrong with this legislation and why it wasn't even allowed to come to a vote?

GOP senators block top Obama jobs initiative - CNN.com

This looks to be a good bill to promote bringing back jobs, private business jobs, to American soil. But the majority of the GOP in the senate blocked it from even being allowed to be voted on. Why?

This screams of partisan politics and again placing priority on blocking anything that the president does as priority #1 even when it comes at the cost of creating American jobs.

So, can someone please explain it to me.

and the 20 or so jobs bills Reid is sitting on.. that isn't partisan? Where's your fauxrage there???

Such as?

don't even try that. You know as well as I do there are about 25 threads and thousands of posts on this subject... and the demtards constantly say none of the bills that are jobs realted are 'really' jobs related. Even the ones with JOBS in the title. I'll give you a list, you'll tow the party line... it's a waste of effort.

 

[Conservative]

What does the GOP have against incentives that would bring jobs to our country?

As it stands NOW, we actually give incentives FOR outsourcing. This bill would have ended that and given breaks to companies that moved back here.

Someone PLEASE explain why the GOP would oppose such a bill.

please see my previous post. It also takes away existing credits to replace them with these. How do you know which is better?

How do we know which one is better? Let's see....incentives to ship jobs overseas or incentives to bring jobs to the U.S. Which one could possibly be "better"... gee, I wonder. Really?

perhaps you misunderstood. This bill takes away existing incentives for that, and replaces them with different ones. Tell me, which is better? The existing incentives, or the new ones?

 

[Jackson]

If you'd read your own link you would know why. Harry Reid wouldn't allow any amendments, as usual. He runs the Senate like his own personal fiefdom, changing the way the Senate has operated for DECADES, all to advance his partisan political agenda.

Had the Republicans done this shit to Democrats when they were in the minority we'd STILL be hearing about it.

One of you loons said he put on too many amendments...

Get your story straight.

Why not just vote on the bill. And if you want to do some other things that are good, introduce a bill to do that.

Unless your goal is to strangle the economy until November so that people will be scared into voting for a weird Mormon Robot.

You're not paying attention, Joe. 'Filling the tree' is the tactic of proposing so many Democrat amendments that the Republicans can't get any of their amendments looked at, let alone voted on. Harry Reid won't allow ANYTHING on the floor from the Republican side.

If you knew half of what you THINK you know, you'd know that.

Amendments shouldn't be allowed on either side. The parties must be forced to work together.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Here's why, their bosses said no:

In a letter to senators this week, the Chamber of Commerce called the bill "misguided" and said it "would hamper American worldwide companies' competitiveness, increase complexity in the Internal Revenue Code, and threaten economic growth."

All good reasons to stop the bill.

Unless of course you can actually prove the bill would do none of those things.

Can you?

 

[zeke]

And it's actually even worse then that because while the government incents companies to say onshore they punish them with regulations and taxes. Jobs are created by profit. Low, flat, simple taxes create the most wealth and opportunity for everyone. Like it or not, all of economics proves that. kaz

Funny shit right there. Lets see. Taxes are at some of the lowest levels in years.

How's those low tax rates working out for us in the jobs department?

And I know you don't run a business, but jobs are created by demand. Selling your product because of the demand and selling your product for more money than it costs to produce that product, that creates profit.

You rethugs seem really REALLY confused about how business works. Outsourcing jobs good to rethugs, bringing jobs to America bad. Weird shit.

 

[Conservative]

If you'd read your own link you would know why. Harry Reid wouldn't allow any amendments, as usual. He runs the Senate like his own personal fiefdom, changing the way the Senate has operated for DECADES, all to advance his partisan political agenda.

Had the Republicans done this shit to Democrats when they were in the minority we'd STILL be hearing about it.

One of you loons said he put on too many amendments...

Get your story straight.

Why not just vote on the bill. And if you want to do some other things that are good, introduce a bill to do that.

Unless your goal is to strangle the economy until November so that people will be scared into voting for a weird Mormon Robot.

You're not paying attention, Joe. 'Filling the tree' is the tactic of proposing so many Democrat amendments that the Republicans can't get any of their amendments looked at, let alone voted on. Harry Reid won't allow ANYTHING on the floor from the Republican side.

If you knew half of what you THINK you know, you'd know that.

except in this case that isnt what happened. 11 amendments introduced, 3 Dem and 8 GOP... none were allowed a vote, so there is no congressional record of their contents. Could have sucked, could have been awesome. We'll never know.

 

[Seawytch]

please see my previous post. It also takes away existing credits to replace them with these. How do you know which is better?

How do we know which one is better? Let's see....incentives to ship jobs overseas or incentives to bring jobs to the U.S. Which one could possibly be "better"... gee, I wonder. Really?

perhaps you misunderstood. This bill takes away existing incentives for that, and replaces them with different ones. Tell me, which is better? The existing incentives, or the new ones?

Um...when the existing incentives are for moving jobs out of the country and the new incentives are to bring jobs back, it's not really difficult to suss out which one is better. Even if the "old" incentive weren't replaced at all, getting rid of it is better no matter what.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And it's actually even worse then that because while the government incents companies to say onshore they punish them with regulations and taxes. Jobs are created by profit. Low, flat, simple taxes create the most wealth and opportunity for everyone. Like it or not, all of economics proves that. kaz

Funny shit right there. Lets see. Taxes are at some of the lowest levels in years.

How's those low tax rates working out for us in the jobs department?

And I know you don't run a business, but jobs are created by demand. Selling your product because of the demand and selling your product for more money than it costs to produce that product, that creates profit.

You rethugs seem really REALLY confused about how business works. Outsourcing jobs good to rethugs, bringing jobs to America bad. Weird shit.

What's the incentive to repatriate profits from foreign subsidiaries only to lose them to punitive taxes?

 

[Jackson]

Here's why, their bosses said no:

In a letter to senators this week, the Chamber of Commerce called the bill "misguided" and said it "would hamper American worldwide companies' competitiveness, increase complexity in the Internal Revenue Code, and threaten economic growth."

All good reasons to stop the bill.

Unless of course you can actually prove the bill would do none of those things.

Can you?

I know about that, but if the unions got out of the business of scalping the manufacturers with these exorbitant pension plans and being paid without working, the price of commodities would come down. We've got to get these jobs back to the US!

Make items made overseas more expensive than what they would be if they were manufactured here.

 

[Seawytch]

Here's why, their bosses said no:

In a letter to senators this week, the Chamber of Commerce called the bill "misguided" and said it "would hamper American worldwide companies' competitiveness, increase complexity in the Internal Revenue Code, and threaten economic growth."

All good reasons to stop the bill.

Unless of course you can actually prove the bill would do none of those things.

Can you?

No more than you can prove that what the Chamber of Outsourcers say is true. It sure as hell seems like a no brainer to stop giving incentives for moving jobs out of the country. You want to do it, fine, your business, but the US taxpayer shouldn't be subsidizing your move.

As a taxpayer, I'd much prefer those incentives go to people who keep their companies and their jobs here, thanks.