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

[Full-Auto]

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.

Like Rick was the only one? I live in a blue state. I dont ever here you mention how our governor did the same thing. Why is that?

 

[ba1614]

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.

Where's the history of raising taxes ending a recession? In the global economy of course, not 80yrs ago.

 

[Moonglow]

not all raod construction companies are in the union

 

[editec]

Same old tired arguments.

We're not in a recession because taxes are too high.

We're not in a recession because the government spends too much money, either.

We in a recession because people are either out of work or fearful that they might become out of work.

We are not in a recession because the wealthy are broke, we're in a recession because the middle class FEELS broke or about to become broke.

Clearly doing something about THAT PROBLEM seems like a path we might consider, eh?

 

[Seawytch]

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.

Where's the history of raising taxes ending a recession? In the global economy of course, not 80yrs ago.

Actually, it has been government spending that has always gotten us clear before. You need revenue for that. Thanks to two invasions and cutting taxes, there is none. Taxing the upper 2%, still at lower rates than Reagan, is not going to hurt them AT ALL.