Why does the left think the government can create jobs?

[auditor0007]

When the US Govt takes 1 trillion dollars of our wealth to "create a job" as Obama did, then all they have done is take 1 trillion dollars (really about 800 billion) of our wealth and re distributed it
It is wealth destruction is all it is

the private sector with the right conditions can create real jobs. How many jobs would that same 800 billion create in the private sector If the those who really pay taxes were allowed to keep that wealth?
What we purchase with that wealth would create work and we would get too keep the end product, instead of it becoming part of Obama's re-election campaign fund
That is real trickle down economics made simple. Allow the tax payer to keep more of his wealth, show him you can be trusted and watch him use it to grow the economy

That all sounds good and all, but the fact is that those wealthy people, business owners and corporations, are sitting on $2 trillion dollars, and they ain't creating a God Damn thing. When you keep spewing the same song over and over again, you would think that you could at least show us some positive results.

Obama can piss that $2 Trillion away in 6 months and it will be gone!

All depends how it is spent. If it is spent on tax breaks, it won't do a thing.

 

[JRK]

That all sounds good and all, but the fact is that those wealthy people, business owners and corporations, are sitting on $2 trillion dollars, and they ain't creating a God Damn thing. When you keep spewing the same song over and over again, you would think that you could at least show us some positive results.

Obama can piss that $2 Trillion away in 6 months and it will be gone!

All depends how it is spent. If it is spent on tax breaks, it won't do a thing.

The monies I have been allowed to keep from 2001 has allowed me to purchase a Truck and a travel trailer
I do not know how many there is in that 65-80,000 a year tax bracket, but that's not a bad reward from GWB
I would say if there is 30 million of us, that's allot of trucks and travel trailers

That is a real byproduct of real tax policy

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That all sounds good and all, but the fact is that those wealthy people, business owners and corporations, are sitting on $2 trillion dollars, and they ain't creating a God Damn thing. When you keep spewing the same song over and over again, you would think that you could at least show us some positive results.

If it is spent on tax breaks, it won't do a thing.

Correct.

The private sector exists to make profits, not jobs. If business could earn profits with no labor costs they’d do it in a heartbeat.

The December 2007 Recession was the best thing to happen to businesses: they got to cut the hated labor costs by laying off workers, maximizing profits, and enriching shareholders. Tax breaks would be used only to increase the proverbial bottom line.

Employers aren’t going to start hiring again until the very last second – when the current level of production can’t keep up with demand, and more workers are needed to meet that demand; employers will only start hiring again when it’s profitable.

 

[Rinata]

The older I get the more convinced I am that liberal viewpoints stem from the ignorance and false understanding of where the money comes from to pay for all the nice programs that they want.

Liberalism is a big problem in this country, half of the people with liberal mindset thinks the government has unlimited funds, its this mentality that has caused our debt.

Well im here to tell the libbs that government doesnt have unlimited funds, and who pays for those programs is the middle class, along with everything else. And we are sick and tired of forking over our lives so you can be a bunch of lazy do nothings with your hands out.

Oh, really??? The last time I looked, GWB was a Republican. He was pretty free with a dollar, remember??? Also, I'm tired of you cheapskates saying things like this. It's really ignorant.

 

[8537]

Lie, I accused you of lying?
now when did I do that?

My gawd man. Try an ounce of intellectual consistency. Here, let's review:
"the rest of your thread has no basis on the in accurate information you supplied" <--That was you. I provided no inaccurate information. I wasn't lying.


Then why do you run from the fact that the rate of job creation was higher in the 1960's and 1970's than in the decades during and following Reagan



Rate, JRK, rate. Hint: Different denominators.

Look 8537, I do not call people liars, i am above that and so is my pay grade.

You claimed I provided inaccurate information, AKA I lied. I didn't.

You have got to be kidding me. It was not accurate information,

You keep repeating that, but I notice you won't point to which information you claim was inaccurate.

No, I'm not kidding.

Look 8537, your going back down the rabbits hole, I use to follow you there
no more
you want to talk like an adult, I am all in
"Different denominators"
later

Well, I didn't expect you to understand it. So, as always, you run away instead. Ciao.

 

[8537]

Are you not defending Government as job creator?

No, I'm not. It would help if you would read my posts once in awhile instead of knee jerking.

 

[candycorn]

because some states have shitty governments that dont take care of the people..

Teachers have real jobs

Police have real jobs.

Meat inspectors have real jobs.

Bridge inspectors have real jobs.

Park rangers have real jobs.

The military has real jobs.

The facts are that government has always created jobs

And those people spend money in the private sector which creates even more jobs.
The GOPsters don't seem to understand this self-evident series of events.

 

[Chris]

Bush cut taxes for the rich and how many jobs has that created?

If we spend that money on education, healthcare, infrastructure, and research, we would be much better off in the long run, than if we wasted it on war and tax cuts for the rich.

But war and tax cuts for the rich are all the Republicans are about.

That and taking away women's reproductive rights.

 

[idb]

Bush cut taxes for the rich and how many jobs has that created?

If we spend that money on education, healthcare, infrastructure, and research, we would be much better off in the long run, than if we wasted it on war and tax cuts for the rich.

But war and tax cuts for the rich are all the Republicans are about.

That and taking away women's reproductive rights.

That's what confuses me.
The rich have been getting hugely richer, so where are the jobs?

 

[candycorn]

Bush cut taxes for the rich and how many jobs has that created?

If we spend that money on education, healthcare, infrastructure, and research, we would be much better off in the long run, than if we wasted it on war and tax cuts for the rich.

But war and tax cuts for the rich are all the Republicans are about.

That and taking away women's reproductive rights.

That's what confuses me.
The rich have been getting hugely richer, so where are the jobs?

Its always confused me too; if we need to create jobs and cutting taxes supposedly does that; why isn't every GOP representative, Senator and candidate for President screaming at the top of his or her lungs that the taxes need to be cut tomorrow?

They talk about budget cuts quite a bit; reducing regulation quite a bit; but apparently none of them are talking about cutting taxes on the rich in an election year.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That's what confuses me.
The rich have been getting hugely richer, so where are the jobs?

Blind partisan dogma can be confusing to the objective non-believer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Are you not defending Government as job creator?

No, I'm not. It would help if you would read my posts once in awhile instead of knee jerking.

You hopped into a thread about government creating jobs and every post seemed sound like Frankie Pentangeli, "Big Government said it created jobs, so I said Yeah! Sure!"

 

[8537]

Are you not defending Government as job creator?

No, I'm not. It would help if you would read my posts once in awhile instead of knee jerking.

You hopped into a thread about government creating jobs and every post seemed sound like Frankie Pentangeli, "Big Government said it created jobs, so I said Yeah! Sure!"

All I've done is point to facts. Facts such as this: The rate of job creation in the 1960's and 1970's was higher than the rate of job creation in any decade since.

Of course, you interpreted that to mean I was obviously advocating for Keynes, that government is the only answer to tepid growth, that the prime rate was 21% under Cart...err, I mean Reagan etc....

You would be better served to read my posts instead of what you wish my posts said. As an earlier poster said, "Blind partisan dogma can be confusing to the objective non-believer."

 

[idb]

That's what confuses me.
The rich have been getting hugely richer, so where are the jobs?

Blind partisan dogma can be confusing to the objective non-believer.

Clearly, I need re-educated.

 

[JRK]

That all sounds good and all, but the fact is that those wealthy people, business owners and corporations, are sitting on $2 trillion dollars, and they ain't creating a God Damn thing. When you keep spewing the same song over and over again, you would think that you could at least show us some positive results.

If it is spent on tax breaks, it won't do a thing.

Correct.

The private sector exists to make profits, not jobs. If business could earn profits with no labor costs they’d do it in a heartbeat.

The December 2007 Recession was the best thing to happen to businesses: they got to cut the hated labor costs by laying off workers, maximizing profits, and enriching shareholders. Tax breaks would be used only to increase the proverbial bottom line.

Employers aren’t going to start hiring again until the very last second – when the current level of production can’t keep up with demand, and more workers are needed to meet that demand; employers will only start hiring again when it’s profitable.

Dec 2007 UE was below 5%, the DJIA was above 13,000 and we had created 1.5 million jobs for the year
Recession? If you say so

 

[toxicmedia]

The Bush admin and the Clinton admin faced very different conditions. I'm not sure I agree with everything here. But hey....at least we both care about America.

Right you are.
whats your feeling on turning this mess around?

I think Americans need to stop expecting the world around them to be made better, or suported, by somebody else...be it the government, or whatever.

There was a time for unions in our past...the late 1800's and early 1900's, when children worked hard, were underpaid, and lost several fingers on the job...and when dock workers were crsuhed by shoddy equipment just to meet delivery schedules. Not so much anymore. Adequate worker protections are in place that negate the need for MOST unions IMHO.

I don't have the answer to kick starting the next big bubble. Right now the Chinese have aleardy surpassed the US in taking advantage of green energy...which is smart....because when fossil fuels become more expensive than green alternatives...IF those green alternatives are developed....the Chinese will be in position for that. Americans need to do what they have done well....INNOVATE....think outside of the box, and I see technology as the only hope. Brick and mortar industrial is out of the question for America. Problem......education.....and the campaign by some folks to eliminate public higher education in America.

I may not have the answer....but that's my larger point. Democrats and Republicans in Washington don't either....because there is no way for politicians to turn this PARTICULAR mess around. Americans must take the wheel and turn this mess around. Obama....or any Republican elected in 2012 won't.

 

[JRK]

No, I'm not. It would help if you would read my posts once in awhile instead of knee jerking.

You hopped into a thread about government creating jobs and every post seemed sound like Frankie Pentangeli, "Big Government said it created jobs, so I said Yeah! Sure!"

All I've done is point to facts. Facts such as this: The rate of job creation in the 1960's and 1970's was higher than the rate of job creation in any decade since.

Of course, you interpreted that to mean I was obviously advocating for Keynes, that government is the only answer to tepid growth, that the prime rate was 21% under Cart...err, I mean Reagan etc....

You would be better served to read my posts instead of what you wish my posts said. As an earlier poster said, "Blind partisan dogma can be confusing to the objective non-believer."

Your post is only correct when you add the govt jobs the tax payers wealth created during the same time period
those jobs after RR tax breaks slowed while private sectors jobs took off

from 1961 thru 1979 we had 29.5 million private sector jobs created in those 19 years or 1.55 million per year

from 1980 thru 1990 we had 19.5 million private sector jobs created or 1.77 million per year

hats even more amazing of this RR boom that lasted until Obama took office was from 83 thru 90 was when those jobs were really created as his tax policy took hold, which is 2.4 million jobs created per year

Another 1/2 truth that I will get attacked for

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

capital gain? you think middle class people do not pay capital gains?
I do
Any one who makes 100k a year better be doing something to make some extra capital

What in the hell does capital gains have to do with income tax? Upi libs kill me with this "I accuse something that has no bearing on what matters" events that have taken over our countries debate
Most conservatives want to do away with all taxes as they are and go to a 9-9-9 style tax to start with
Next your side had total control of the senate, house and the white house from 09-10, why didn't you change it then?

Middle class people do not earn almost all of their income in the form of capital gains. The special capital gains tax rate was designed so that the uber-wealthy wall street investors could pay less tax than you and I on the meat of their income. They don't even have to pay FICA taxes on the first ~106 K of what they earn like you and I. I self employed person pays 15.something percent on all of their income up to ~106K - so the self employed shrimp boat owner or pizza shop owner or house painter or barge inspector has to pay MORE on his FIRST dollar of income than the self employed wall st
investor (day traders excepted) has to pay on his LAST dollar earned!

To make the point clearer -
if Joe the Businessman who sweats for a living makes $1 in profit for the year - he will pay 15.3%.
if Bob the wall street investor who sits a home collecting stock dividends all day makes $10,000,000 in profit for the year - he will pay 15.0%.
A LOWER rate than Joe the Businessman pays on his FIRST dollar.


Which makes the effective taxation REGRESSIVE. Not to mention that Joe the businessman, if he makes more than that $1, can wind up earning some dollars that are taxed as high as 43.3% - while ALL of Bob the investors dollars get taxed at 15%. For instance, if Joe is single, his 105,000th dollar is taxed at 43.3 cents (15.3 for FICA and 28 for income) - while Bob's is still just taxed at 15 cents!

If anything - it should be the other way around. Money earned by labor (be it white or blue collar) should not be taxed MORE than money earned from market fortune, that's just absurd. The essential statement by the tax code is that sweat and innovation is less valuable to society than the ability to pick a good horse at the tracks.




So now "most" conservatives want a 9-9-9? Gee, I thought most of them wanted the "fair tax". You guys change your minds a lot. Hey why not a 1-1-1?

 

[JRK]

capital gain? you think middle class people do not pay capital gains?
I do
Any one who makes 100k a year better be doing something to make some extra capital

What in the hell does capital gains have to do with income tax? Upi libs kill me with this "I accuse something that has no bearing on what matters" events that have taken over our countries debate
Most conservatives want to do away with all taxes as they are and go to a 9-9-9 style tax to start with
Next your side had total control of the senate, house and the white house from 09-10, why didn't you change it then?

Middle class people do not earn almost all of their income in the form of capital gains. The special capital gains tax rate was designed so that the uber-wealthy wall street investors could pay less tax than you and I on the meat of their income.

If anything - it should be the other way around. Money earned by labor (be it white or blue collar) should not be taxed MORE than money earned from market fortune, that's just absurd. The essential statement by the tax code is that sweat and innovation is less valuable to society than the ability to pick a good horse at the tracks.




So now "most" conservatives want a 9-9-9? Gee, I thought most of them wanted the "fair tax". You guys change your minds a lot. Hey why not a 1-1-1?

Capital gains are a gain that requires no help from the public sector. simply put for me to purchase a stock or an option only takes my computer, My Sprint account, My TD Ameritrade account and some cash
Why should I be taxed the same for that (or for that matter any)? don't you understand what the difference is from utilizing public domain to create wealth and using all private domain to create wealth?
Its my money I am putting at risk, Not the tax payers

And as far as the 9-9-9 goes vs fair tax?
Fair tax is my preference, but I think 9-9-9 has a better chance of passing. The tax system we have in place is 100% the problem

 

[8537]

You hopped into a thread about government creating jobs and every post seemed sound like Frankie Pentangeli, "Big Government said it created jobs, so I said Yeah! Sure!"

All I've done is point to facts. Facts such as this: The rate of job creation in the 1960's and 1970's was higher than the rate of job creation in any decade since.

Of course, you interpreted that to mean I was obviously advocating for Keynes, that government is the only answer to tepid growth, that the prime rate was 21% under Cart...err, I mean Reagan etc....

You would be better served to read my posts instead of what you wish my posts said. As an earlier poster said, "Blind partisan dogma can be confusing to the objective non-believer."

Your post is only correct when you add the govt jobs the tax payers wealth created during the same time period

No, that's not right. The rate of private sector job growth was higher during the decades of the 1960's and 1970's than in any time since.

from 1961 thru 1979 we had 29.5 million private sector jobs created in those 19 years or 1.55 million per year

from 1980 thru 1990 we had 19.5 million private sector jobs created or 1.77 million per year

^proving once again that you don't understand rates.