The Needed Addition to the President's Job Plan - Made in America

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
 

ba1614

Silver Member
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
3,812
Reaction score
884
Points
98
Location
Deep in the Northern Woods
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,660
Points
48
Location
Maine
Grand idea.

Tariffs are the best way to implement it.
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
 

Warrior102

Gold Member
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
16,554
Reaction score
4,120
Points
183
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
Is that becuase Barry Sotero told you they were?

Idiot....
 

ba1614

Silver Member
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
3,812
Reaction score
884
Points
98
Location
Deep in the Northern Woods
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
How much global pressure were our products and services under then compared to now?

It was difficult to pick up and move in the 50s, now it's almost an overnight job.
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
Is that becuase Barry Sotero told you they were?

Idiot....
Yeah, he called me last night and we chatted. Fortunately, he provided actual data...

For seven of Reagan’s eight years in office, the top tax rate was higher than the current 35 percent. In six of those years, it was 50 percent or more. And every year that Regan was in office, the bottom tax bracket was higher than the current ten percent.

For a family of four, the “average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent.” During Reagan’s time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years.

Douche...
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
How much global pressure were our products and services under then compared to now?

It was difficult to pick up and move in the 50s, now it's almost an overnight job.
It was an "overnight" job in the 90s too. Raising taxes didn't hurt job creation then did it?

Now, back to "Made in America"...

I do believe "Made in America" bills have been introduced before...who introduced them? What stopped them?
 

Full-Auto

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
13,555
Reaction score
1,624
Points
153
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
This new stimulus gives each state about 2 billion. The funds just like last time will be diverted to pay for projects already underway.

This is just another union payoff.
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
This new stimulus gives each state about 2 billion. The funds just like last time will be diverted to pay for projects already underway.

This is just another union payoff.
The mistake with the last stimulus was in allowing governors to plug their deficits with it (ahem, Rick Perry). It is my understanding that the jobs bill money could only be used for actual "shovel ready" projects.
 

Warrior102

Gold Member
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
16,554
Reaction score
4,120
Points
183
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
Is that becuase Barry Sotero told you they were?

Idiot....
Yeah, he called me last night and we chatted. Fortunately, he provided actual data...

For seven of Reagan’s eight years in office, the top tax rate was higher than the current 35 percent. In six of those years, it was 50 percent or more. And every year that Regan was in office, the bottom tax bracket was higher than the current ten percent.

For a family of four, the “average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent.” During Reagan’s time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years.

Douche...
Barry aint no Reagan - hell, he ain't no Carter for that matter.

Put your nose back into Barry's ass now
 

strollingbones

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
87,437
Reaction score
21,761
Points
2,190
Location
chicken farm
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
This new stimulus gives each state about 2 billion. The funds just like last time will be diverted to pay for projects already underway.

This is just another union payoff.

link?
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
Is that becuase Barry Sotero told you they were?

Idiot....
Yeah, he called me last night and we chatted. Fortunately, he provided actual data...

For seven of Reagan’s eight years in office, the top tax rate was higher than the current 35 percent. In six of those years, it was 50 percent or more. And every year that Regan was in office, the bottom tax bracket was higher than the current ten percent.

For a family of four, the “average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent.” During Reagan’s time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years.

Douche...
Barry aint no Reagan - hell, he ain't no Carter for that matter.

Put your nose back into Barry's ass now
Awww, facts hurt your feelings?

You're right though...President Obama is no Reagan. He hasn't raised the debt ceiling 17 times, taxes 11, granted amnesty to millions of illegals or sold arms to Iran.
 

Warrior102

Gold Member
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
16,554
Reaction score
4,120
Points
183
Yeah, he called me last night and we chatted. Fortunately, he provided actual data...

For seven of Reagan’s eight years in office, the top tax rate was higher than the current 35 percent. In six of those years, it was 50 percent or more. And every year that Regan was in office, the bottom tax bracket was higher than the current ten percent.

For a family of four, the “average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent.” During Reagan’s time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years.

Douche...
Barry aint no Reagan - hell, he ain't no Carter for that matter.

Put your nose back into Barry's ass now
Awww, facts hurt your feelings?

You're right though...President Obama is no Reagan. He hasn't raised the debt ceiling 17 times, taxes 11, granted amnesty to millions of illegals or sold arms to Iran.
How does Barry's ass taste ?
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
148,092
Reaction score
16,486
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Yeah, he called me last night and we chatted. Fortunately, he provided actual data...

For seven of Reagan’s eight years in office, the top tax rate was higher than the current 35 percent. In six of those years, it was 50 percent or more. And every year that Regan was in office, the bottom tax bracket was higher than the current ten percent.

For a family of four, the “average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent.” During Reagan’s time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years.

Douche...
Barry aint no Reagan - hell, he ain't no Carter for that matter.

Put your nose back into Barry's ass now
Awww, facts hurt your feelings?

You're right though...President Obama is no Reagan. He hasn't raised the debt ceiling 17 times, taxes 11, granted amnesty to millions of illegals or sold arms to Iran.
nor is Obama back stabiing anti-labor president
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
Barry aint no Reagan - hell, he ain't no Carter for that matter.

Put your nose back into Barry's ass now
Awww, facts hurt your feelings?

You're right though...President Obama is no Reagan. He hasn't raised the debt ceiling 17 times, taxes 11, granted amnesty to millions of illegals or sold arms to Iran.
How does Barry's ass taste ?
Can't argue the facts can ya, sad sack? Oh, and the President's ass is d-e-l-i-c-i-o-u-s.

How's that spoiled Reagan ass? :lol:
 

ba1614

Silver Member
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
3,812
Reaction score
884
Points
98
Location
Deep in the Northern Woods
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
How much global pressure were our products and services under then compared to now?

It was difficult to pick up and move in the 50s, now it's almost an overnight job.
It was an "overnight" job in the 90s too. Raising taxes didn't hurt job creation then did it?

Now, back to "Made in America"...

I do believe "Made in America" bills have been introduced before...who introduced them? What stopped them?
When Clinton raised taxes it was pretty obvious a recovery was well under way. That sure isn't the case today.
Inflation was low, energy costs were low, not involved in as many global conflicts, the dot com boom was on, lots of differences between even the 90s and now.
I contend the 90s would've been even better (for all but the useless) than it was had it not been for the Clinton tax increases.

Made in America is great, and I try to as much as I can, but legislating the tax payer buy overpriced union products is something I don't support.
 
OP
Seawytch

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
40,232
Reaction score
6,227
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
How much global pressure were our products and services under then compared to now?

It was difficult to pick up and move in the 50s, now it's almost an overnight job.
It was an "overnight" job in the 90s too. Raising taxes didn't hurt job creation then did it?

Now, back to "Made in America"...

I do believe "Made in America" bills have been introduced before...who introduced them? What stopped them?
When Clinton raised taxes it was pretty obvious a recovery was well under way. That sure isn't the case today.
Inflation was low, energy costs were low, not involved in as many global conflicts, the dot com boom was on, lots of differences between even the 90s and now.
I contend the 90s would've been even better (for all but the useless) than it was had it not been for the Clinton tax increases.

Made in America is great, and I try to as much as I can, but legislating the tax payer buy overpriced union products is something I don't support.
Raising taxes on the upper 2% of Americans isn't going to hurt recovery. Cutting social safety nets WILL. Nothing in history supports your contention.
 

Soggy in NOLA

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
40,569
Reaction score
5,352
Points
1,830
The President's plan is a good one. It's chock full of things that should make both sides happy...the key to compromise.

I do believe, however, that it is missing a key provision...that all infrastructure projects carry the "Made in America" label.

Solar panels and steel can't be bought from China. No outsourcing labor. Put AMERICANS back to work using AMERICAN products.

Which party, d'ya think, would give the most pushback on such a provision?
Another addition would be a way to pay for it that doesn't further discourage job creators.
Sorry, but to push the meme that raising taxes on the wealthy hurts job creation, you would have to completely ignore the 50s and the 90s.

Taxes were higher under Reagan for pity sake...
You Marxists love rummaging through others' wallets don't ya?

:lol:
 

Soggy in NOLA

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
40,569
Reaction score
5,352
Points
1,830
It was an "overnight" job in the 90s too. Raising taxes didn't hurt job creation then did it?

Now, back to "Made in America"...

I do believe "Made in America" bills have been introduced before...who introduced them? What stopped them?
When Clinton raised taxes it was pretty obvious a recovery was well under way. That sure isn't the case today.
Inflation was low, energy costs were low, not involved in as many global conflicts, the dot com boom was on, lots of differences between even the 90s and now.
I contend the 90s would've been even better (for all but the useless) than it was had it not been for the Clinton tax increases.

Made in America is great, and I try to as much as I can, but legislating the tax payer buy overpriced union products is something I don't support.
Raising taxes on the upper 2% of Americans isn't going to hurt recovery. Cutting social safety nets WILL. Nothing in history supports your contention.
Yes, everybody knows that spending more money and taxing the shit out of 2% of the popualtion will fix everything.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top