What did we learn from POTUS' Infomercial?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Texanmike, Sep 9, 2011.

  1. Texanmike
    Offline

    Texanmike Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    725
    Thanks Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +88
    "You must pass this now..." All that was missing from the speech was Billy Mays "And that's not all!"

    Seriously, the most important point of the whole speech was glossed over by everyone and has largely been ignored, or even praised. "Its working in Georgia so we're going to put it in this bill." Seriously? What leads you to believe that if it works in Georgia that it will work in Michigan? California? Oklahoma? New York? If it works in Georgia then publicize it and let the other states, who feel it might work there, make it happen in those states.

    This was the stimulus package remix... jobs edition. We're going to start working on infrastructure? Didn't we spend a trillion on a program similar to this a few months ago? Stop me if you've heard this before but he said that he wants small business to hire people. Tell me something... Do you care if it is a small business, a large business, a corporation or a bean bag with eyes that was bequeathed a billion dollar trust fund? Do you care who hires someone? And do you think that small businesses are in as good of a position to hire someone as say, a large corporation?

    Another question I would humbly pose, if I may. Why are we extending unemployment benefits again? And where did this myth come from that it stimulates the economy? The age old argument that "the money goes directly back into the economy" is preposterous. Is it addition by subtraction? Don't we take the money out of the economy to give it to the unemployed? Doesn't the government have a surcharge that they take (in the form of waste)? Of course this one is going to be paid for... right? By taxes, right? Then how can it add to the economy. The economy gives (or rather is accosted by the government) the government a $100 bill. The government quickly makes change into 5 1's 11 5's and 2 20's. Before it hands out the change, it skims a $20 for all of its dispersal fees and then it hands the money to the economy. Did the government put money into the economy? NO! It took money from the economy and then put some of it back. If that's not the way this is working then someone's lying. Either this does nothing for the economy (but is a great way to garner votes I'm sure) or it won't be paid for ahead of time.

    Wow, my head is spinning. Perhaps I'll come back later and finish, then again... maybe not...

    Mike
     
  2. pgm
    Offline

    pgm Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    510
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    South Florida
    Ratings:
    +34
    Well, he left out that, although the plan is helping Georgians who participate in the plan get back to work faster than those who don't, Georgia can't afford it because its loans from the federal government are due.

    But the plan does sound like the kind of thing that should work. Instead of collecting unemployment, you go to work for a company and the government gives you a stipend. The employer trains you and tries you out on the job for a little bit. At the end of the period, not everyone was offered a job, but the unemployed person used those skills to find other jobs. It does cost a bit of money, but it makes more sense than simply paying people to look for work. Retraining workers is one of the keys of Germany's industrial success, so it would be nice to experiment with that here.
     
  3. MeBelle
    Offline

    MeBelle Mebellien Mothership © Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2011
    Messages:
    15,003
    Thanks Received:
    5,342
    Trophy Points:
    340
    Ratings:
    +6,151
  4. Texanmike
    Offline

    Texanmike Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    725
    Thanks Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +88
    I agree with the bold. We are already experimenting with it here. IN GEORGIA. That's the point. We don't know if it works everywhere. Some states may not even want it. And have we considered the long term effects? What happens when companies figure out that they don't have to hire you? That they can get free labor for a time by taking on this government scheme and then letting you go?

    And educating? Why are we hiring teachers if we are getting our education on the job? Seriously? This whole thing is just another scam. Just like the last guy he's floating general statements out there without thing about them. I swear I will vote a straight Disney ticket in 2012 if this bill passes. There is nothing to like about this bill.

    Here's a good one. You don't have to pay someone while you train them, then you get a $4,000 tax break when you do hire them. How is that not punishing the guy who is looking for a job because he is unhappy with his situation and wants a change? Not only that but we have now made the fact that nobody has wanted to hire you a positive on your resume? "psst. Tell you what, I want to hire you, but you've been unemployed for 5 moths." What say you stick it out, live on unemployment for another month and then when you get here I'll get an extra $4k in tax breaks?"

    This is the stupidest, most corrupt plan I've ever seen. Our government is looser than a drunk sailor with his money these days and now we're finding new ways to take it up the poop shoot.

    Dammit!

    Mike
     
  5. pgm
    Offline

    pgm Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    510
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    South Florida
    Ratings:
    +34
    The problem with making it a state-by-state program is that most of the states are broke. Despite our debt, the federal government is not even close to being broke.

    I don't know why the states wouldn't want a plan that allows people to work for no more money than unemployment insurance was already costing. But, honestly, at this point, I don't really care what the states want. There's no reason why this wouldn't work nationally and this stalling makes things worse.

    Geeze, you're making me do my homework. I was hoping to just half-ass it. The complaint about labor exploitation is a common criticism of the Georgia jobs plan from the Left. But 25% of those who participated were hired by the company and 60% found a job in a few months. It just makes more sense than unemployment insurance. Employers can try exploiting the system, but constant turnover of the workforce is a bad business model.

    You've never received on-the-job training in your life?

    While that's an understandable argument, the advantage right now is with freshly unemployed. Companies simply don't want to hire those who have been unemployed for longer than six months. With the average time spent unemployed increasing all the time, this is getting to be a more serious problem. These people become unemployable without government help.

    Anyway, the biggest reason this proposal will be in the plan is because it has drawn bi-partisan support.
     
  6. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    This was a rehash of ideas that have failed before and will fail again. There was no proposal here btw. There was a list of suggestions, light on detail.
    If $800B failed to work then why would $450B of the same thing work?
     
  7. pgm
    Offline

    pgm Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    510
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    South Florida
    Ratings:
    +34
    It certainly won't bring us back to 5% unemployment. But history has shown that raising taxes (payroll tax) and cutting spending (unemployment, aid to the states) is certainly the worst thing to do. The fear right now is double dip. If you give a little bit of money in people's pockets and create a few new jobs, you can produce a bit of confidence.

    Unlike many on the Left, I don't believe companies are hording cash because they're assholes (I'm simplifying). I believe they're hording because they fear another recession and they want to be ready for it. If things get incrementally better from this plan, it may bring back some willingness to spend and invest (which can spur its own growth).

    This plan isn't enough to make employment numbers look good for Obama's re-election campaign, but it should make things better than this awful summer.
     
  8. Tank
    Offline

    Tank Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    13,963
    Thanks Received:
    1,760
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,010
    Wish he would have said some thing about all these black folks that don't want to work.
     
  9. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    No, geezus. "Putting cash in people's pockets" does nothing. We have had long experience with this chestnut and it isn't true. The payroll tax cut has already been tried and it is a loser. All it did was increase the deficit. Tax cuts of this type do not encourage either more work or more investment, which is what will create jobs. Piling on more UE benefits will continue to encourage UE.
     
  10. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    That would be rude. Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangel were probably in the audience.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page