Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The "war" has been from the Republicans on the "middle class".
Listen to Republicans plan for health care - "tax credits". Yea, give a tax credit to these poor people and they will use it to buy health insurance - Oh yea, sure they would.
Why do Republcians hate the "middle class"? The "middle class" is the "real base" of the US.
The "war" has been from the Republicans on the "middle class".
Listen to Republicans plan for health care - "tax credits". Yea, give a tax credit to these poor people and they will use it to buy health insurance - Oh yea, sure they would.
Why do Republcians hate the "middle class"? The "middle class" is the "real base" of the US.
How is a healthcare tax credit a war on the middle class?
Big government is destroying the lower & middle class. Big government only favors government employees & the rich. Under the Obama government expansion the average government employees now get paid 35% more than private sector employees. Also the rich have increased their wealth & bonuses under Obama.
Yeah, the Middle Class needs more government jobs!What is destroying the Middle Class is the enormous tax cuts for the rich and moving jobs overseas to countries who have a public option so companies don't have to pay for health care.
And thus are a net drain on growth. Government jobs are inelastic, unable to adapt to a changing marketplace, and drag an economy down. That they now pay better than the private sector is a cause of America's decline.Govt jobs have good benefits and pay higher than average ones.
And thus are a net drain on growth. Government jobs are inelastic, unable to adapt to a changing marketplace, and drag an economy down. That they now pay better than the private sector is a cause of America's decline.Govt jobs have good benefits and pay higher than average ones.
Nowhere else was this clearer than in Soviet Russia, where all jobs were government jobs.
And thus are a net drain on growth. Government jobs are inelastic, unable to adapt to a changing marketplace, and drag an economy down. That they now pay better than the private sector is a cause of America's decline.Govt jobs have good benefits and pay higher than average ones.
Nowhere else was this clearer than in Soviet Russia, where all jobs were government jobs.
Yes, but something else needs to be substituted for the govt jobs.
But then again is it wrong to be an actual part of your government?
And thus are a net drain on growth. Government jobs are inelastic, unable to adapt to a changing marketplace, and drag an economy down. That they now pay better than the private sector is a cause of America's decline.
Nowhere else was this clearer than in Soviet Russia, where all jobs were government jobs.
Yes, but something else needs to be substituted for the govt jobs.
But then again is it wrong to be an actual part of your government?
If the government would get the hell out of the way and just let the private sector work, they would provide the jobs.
There is nothing wrong with being part of the government but we simply cannot afford to have more and more people working for the government. Because we have to pay them from taxes and, as you say, they get paid more and have higher benefits. Who the hell do you think pays for that?
Depending upon the size and type of government bureaucracy, each government job exists at the cost of 1-3 private sector jobs that will never be created. This is the hidden cost of taxes, known to economists as deadweight loss. Deadweight loss is what held the Soviets back, while America was surging into the future.Yes, but something else needs to be substituted for the govt jobs.
No, if you provide one of the services best supplied by a government. These services have been well-established by economists, including military, law, basic research, and urban infrastructure.But then again is it wrong to be an actual part of your government?
Yes, but something else needs to be substituted for the govt jobs.
But then again is it wrong to be an actual part of your government?
If the government would get the hell out of the way and just let the private sector work, they would provide the jobs.
There is nothing wrong with being part of the government but we simply cannot afford to have more and more people working for the government. Because we have to pay them from taxes and, as you say, they get paid more and have higher benefits. Who the hell do you think pays for that?
Umm I dont think we have re-regulated anything yet. So why did not the de-regulations work? Or why did they quit working?
Depending upon the size and type of government bureaucracy, each government job exists at the cost of 1-3 private sector jobs that will never be created. This is the hidden cost of taxes, known to economists as deadweight loss. Deadweight loss is what held the Soviets back, while America was surging into the future.Yes, but something else needs to be substituted for the govt jobs.
Note: Deadweight loss also occurs under monopoly or monopsony.
No, if you provide one of the services best supplied by a government. These services have been well-established my economists, including military, law, basic research, and urban infrastructure.But then again is it wrong to be an actual part of your government?
If you're not a soldier, a policeman, a lawyer, a basic scientist, or an urban planner, you'd best serve the country in the private sector.
There's no doubt in my mind.So you agree? We are going down some for quite a while?
There's no doubt in my mind.So you agree? We are going down some for quite a while?
What worries me is that this administration is hellbent on sacrificing long-term growth to reduce short-term pain. Obama's expansion of government (via cap-and-trade, healthcare, job bills) will decrease unemployment in the short-run, but will create a permanent unemployed underclass.
This means America will never again have unemployment below 8%, if Obama has his way.
De-regulation is a myth.Umm I dont think we have re-regulated anything yet. So why did not the de-regulations work? Or why did they quit working?
Granted, he is only the latest in a long string of government-expansionists.Once we look back we may realize that Obama did not play a significant part in the process.
Granted, he is only the latest in a long string of government-expansionists.Once we look back we may realize that Obama did not play a significant part in the process.
Still, his keystone legislation promises to be the largest and most growth-inhibiting the US has ever seen. This is undeniable, even the Congressional Budget Office admits this.
