BUSH PROPOSING 'RE-EMPLOYMENT ACCOUNTS'

AP ^ | 01/07/03 | SCOTT LINDLAW

[nypokerface]

WASHINGTON (AP) . President Bush is proposing ``re-employment accounts'' of up to $3,000 to help jobless Americans and a new round of tax cuts that will touch 92 million people, brushing aside criticism that the economic growth package he is unveiling Tuesday is tailored to help the rich.

[areafiftyone]

That's a smart idea. It will give people incentive to pound the pavement. Bush is really sticking it to the Dems. I think this will go over well with the American public.

[dirtboy]

President Bush is proposing ``re-employment accounts'' of up to $3,000 to help jobless Americans

This sounds pretty squirrely to me - this would end up being a real boondoggle.

The White House said 92 million taxpayers would get an average tax cut of $1,083 this year under Bush's plan.

I would also like to see the median for this. For a middle-class taxpayer, the amount would be much less.

IMO, there should be two tax cuts: Elimination of the tax on dividends to help boost investment and the stock market, and cut two points from FICA, since that money, ostensibly for the bogus trust fund, is just spent by the government anyway. That would bring immediate tax relief to the entire spectrum of taxpaying Americans...

[mikenola]

I don't see how another $3k is going to help get people back to work, especially after we've extended UI so long.

I favor the payroll tax holiday for 3-6 months, which will both turbocharge consumer spending, and also wake people up to how much cash the fedgov really is taking from them. That might give us real support for some tax reform.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Rats want to give you $300. Republicans want to give you a job.

[hobbes1]

It's not about that. It's about proposing heavy duty tax reform, and using the Unemplyed 3k, to cut off the Dems Ba!!$ before they can atttack.

Pretty Brilliant.

[ARCADIA]

Forget the unemployed, and worry about job creation. If you want someone to be hired then offer the $3000 to employers as a training subsidy for the newly hired. Starvation is a pretty strong motivator. An extra $3K AFTER you get hired is a meaningless joke.

[AppyPappy]

The government can't create jobs. They can only encourage creation by lowering taxes.

[hobbes1]

No, because without the proposal, you willbe unable to enact meaningful tax reform in the first place. That is the point.

I am constantly amazed, at how the people here, grasp policy, and its itinerant effects, but get completely befuddled on the equally important political nuancing of the policy enactment.

[TLBSHOW]

Rats want to give you $300. Republicans want to give you a job.

BUMP

[hobbes1]

If you want someone to be hired then offer the $3000 to employers as a training subsidy for the newly hired.

Heres a lesson.

If they do what you say, how will the dems spin that...

As a subsidy to big business. The point of that part of the program is to neutralize the Opposition. No more, No less.

[cynicom]

As a "conservative", I wonder if Bush has ever considered "cutting" the government???? Just a thought.

[TLBSHOW]

He is, they won't get all that money from the workers of America!

[arete]

Thread already started with same story. Link to original. Re-Employment Accounts

Richard W.

[cynicom]

Borrowing money to give away never seemed to me to be a sound business practice. Perhaps the theory is, borrow now,stimulate the economy, repay later? What is out debt now and how much are we repaying on it this year??? None??? Wish I could do that, I would be rich and fat like our government.

[Chemist_Geek]

I favor the payroll tax holiday for 3-6 months, which will both turbocharge consumer spending, and also wake people up to how much cash the fedgov really is taking from them. That might give us real support for some tax reform.

Allow me to be cynical, but I don't think that, during the "holiday", employees will see any of that money which would pay the payroll tax...

[Samurai_Jack]

Forget the unemployed, and worry about job creation.

I would not put it so bluntly as 'FORGET' the unemployed. However, I would agree that an unemployed person doesnt need MORE Unemployment. That person needs more JOBS. And you dont stimulate job creation by handing out temporary monies to potential voters and praying for a recovery. You have to stimulate the Job Market by getting the government off of the backs of the Employers.

Accelerating deductions planned for business equipment sounds like a good idea to me. This will stimulate the Tech market by encouraging corporations to upgrade their business equipment. Mr Bush learned from his fathers adminitration that you cannot sit on a 60% approval rating and wait to be reelected. The Economy is going to have to be in an easily identifiable (even by Democrats) upswing well before the next election cycle or he will be out of a job regardless of the outcome of the Iraqi Conflict. Another lesson from the Bush 41 Presidency is "Never Make a Deal with a Democrat". Lets hope that Bugh 43 Learned that lesson.

[vannrox]

The President's plan sounds good to me.


He is certainly "thinking outside the box".

However, as an unemployed "Substantially over-skilled Technical Degreed White Collar Engineer" who has been out of work since February...The proposal wouldn't help me one bit. The day I was laid off I started looking. And, as an "expert" in searching for work (laid off 15 times in the last 20 years), I can tell you that it's a really tight job market out there.


I hope that I can qualify for the plan, as I accepted work at Burger King. It has nothing to do with computers, plastics, automation, ProE, Catia, DFM, DOE, Cobra or "Black Belt", but it may just qualify me for the program.


But I don't think so.


The reports describe the program as time limited. Thus requiring one to obtain a position...any position... to get the benefit. The $3000 is a pittance. My rate in the Boston area is over $100,000 / year. It doesn't seem that the plan is geared for highly technical or specialized skill levels.


However, I applaud the President for his plan and the shear uniqueness of it. I hope that it eventually is morphed into the existing unemployment schemes to some dreee, and further I hope that the States maintain their own independence from the Federal Purse strings. I hate that fact that some bonehead from South Dakota held up the resolution of my unemployment benefits.


I would like to see a number of changes to the unemployment plans changed. Most of which would be the changes made during the Clinton Administration. These changes would include...


Not to tax unemployment monies.
Deduction for Divorces that occur duringin Unemployment.
Deductions for Bankrupsies that occur during unemployment.
Interest free "grace Period" on school loan payments during periods of unemployment.
Fees and fines for employers who downsize during a profitable year.
Contract breech clauses that provide reduced fee structures for employers to sue the parent company....


etc.


I am not discussing the issues related to "Blue Collar" layoffs. Nor, an I referrring to people to Invest as the primary income generating revenue source for their family. Nor, am I referring to the Small Business Owner, or Independent Contractor or Self Imployed person. Nor ans I not referring to those involved in a union.


All those above mentioned people are not exposed to the same kinds of conditions and situations that an unemployed technical professional faces. Further, since this recession involves over 85% of the the laid off people being between the ages of 35 and 45 and most being skilled white collar professionals, it would be very difficult for someone who is not in that class to understand the impacts of a mid-career termination.


As I said, I like what Bush is saying. Let's just see what Congress has to offer.

[lewislynn]

I think it's going to be more fun watching Republicans run from Bush's tax cuts than the expected Democrats.

[Michael Barnes]

Yup...I'll be surprised if there is no dissent in our party....then again, that may just be the plan..who knows.