Posted on 07/20/2009 1:55:27 AM PDT by Mount Athos
The single most irrefutable and basic fact of politics is that, “Americans vote with their wallets.” BHO has until 2012 to turn the economy around, and then he’s toast. If he hasn’t done it by the mid-term elections of 2010, the Democrats are toast.
And that’s all she wrote.
My friend, you are unfamiliar with something known as “kitchen table economics.” It’s widely practiced in America; you might want to familiarize yourself with it.
It is the oddball economic notion of this: The deeper in debt the gov’t dives into, the more frugal the citizens of that same gov’t become. It’s a “fear” thing. This is the reason that the polling numbers against a second stimulus are so enormous. Each and every time Americans hear of politicians willing to add another significant layer of debt, you can depend on them drawing their checkbooks inward.
Obama doesn’t understand or know this now. It won’t be long until he does, however.
I thought the article said his approval was 59% not 51%. I wish it was 51% but I think that’s just for his handling of health care,which right now is the more important statistic.
“Elections each year for each office would be a disaster. Nothing would ever get done because there would be no time for anything except campaigning.”
And that differs from the status quo in some significant way?
I totally disagree. He could have used the "stimulus" money to implement an immediate tax cut. This money would have immediately been available for businesses to hire more people. The effect would easily have been in place by now.
Rasmussen has him at 51% while the liberal pollsters such as CBS, ABC, etc have him around 60%. In the past the liberal media pollsters haven’t been nearly as accurate as has Rasmussen o I tend to go along with his results. the media has long been known to strongly over sample Dems to get the desired results.
Term limits would do the job. But how are we ever gonna get it passed? The asshats in office will never vote in term limits, as it would push them right out of office.
Obama has done exactly the wrong thing in a Recession. He has threatened increased taxation on everyone. With those threats, employers hold off hiring. The rich consider moving to other countries. Oh yes, the President has effected the economy - BADLY
The poor will feel the increased energy costs in the price of everything they eat. They will feel it in the costs of everything they wear and they will feel it in Transportation as the costs trickle down in higher energy costs.
Obama could have given $200 Billion in tax breaks for businesses to hire a person in 2009. Unemployment would vanished overnight and the economy would have been kick started.
But Obama has done the opposite and the unemployment figures show it.
I agree re:Rasmussen. I thought you were commenting on ABC/WashPost poll
Naturally economics is not called the dismal science because it is cut and dry. I respectfully disagree with the notion that a tax cut would be useful for the employment situation.
A $200 billion tax credit for jobs might be the worst possible thing. Here is why:
1. The government then has an indirect “make work” scheme in which it is lowering the marginal cost of labor which due to the current gap between supply and demand might exacerbate the situation in the medium term leading to long-term unemployment (i.e. the natural rate) to settle at a higher level than the 4-5% it currently is
2. The multiplier effect of such an indirect stimulus to the labor market is unknown and is likely lower than the direct Keynsian model employed (although I don’t necessarily support that choice either, but choosing an equally bad option won’t create more jobs).
3. Worst of all, it would be impossible to enact such a support in a manner that did not lead to huge abuse. If I am an employer and know the government will give me a tax break to hire (or not fire) employees, naturally I am going to fire (or not fire) more people than I otherwise would to take advantage of the tax break. Then when things do get better and the tax break disappears I have more people than I need at potentially higher wages than I can pay and need to get rid of them - thus defeating the long-term aspects.
Economics are tricky. Feel free to provide opposing scenarios. But I stick by my statement that other than issues related to confidence there is NOTHING this or any other President could do to affect unemployment numbers short of real hard-core socialism - which we don’t have . . . yet.
The economy is a result of actions of millions of people. People respond (predictably) to appropriate actions. Give them a check, and they will spend it. Give them a tax cut, and they will permanently adjust their economic behavior.
You did not respond to my arguments. Just plainly stated a support of tax cuts. I get the plain logic, but the specific post was about a targeted tax cut to support hiring people, not a “general” tax cut.
By your logic cutting taxes on cigarettes would help the general economy. Which it might, but it would also increase smoking - which might not be so good.
Feel free to respond to the specific points. I don’t disagree with you in general, but I was defending my point that there was nothing Obama or any president could have done in 6 months short of full scale socalism to affect the employment rate in any effective manner. I stand by that statement.
IF this gov’t is intent on enacting cap & trade and health care. AND the Bush tax cuts are going away next year. And the minimum wage is going up in 4 days. There is also an increase in the Medicare tax that I’m unfamiliar with, that’s coming soon.
If I were in charge of this wing ding, I would announce an IMMEDIATE end to any and all corporate taxes. (They cost nearly more to collect than they generate, anyway.)
You wanna increase jobs? That’s how.
Oh and one more thing.
Not only to eliminate corporate taxes....but also to eliminate corporate welfare.
Corporate Welfare is a charming, quaint term from the past, used exclusively when conservatives were in office. You remember, the Democrats used to rail against it. It was favors done for corporations.
This means: No bailouts. No special lines of credit at the Fed window. No special tax treatment. And on and on.
In principle I agree. On the last part, you are sounding Ron Paulish. The rescue of the financial industry was necessary to prevent a complete collapse of credit and Depression-like conditions. I hated it as much as anyone, but it was a necessity and no POTUS who took the oath of office and believed it would have done otherwise.
I answered the second post first, but the complete elimination of corporate taxes would be the most brilliant and effective way for the US to maintain global dominance of the corporate world, create jobs, generate additional tax renvenue (indireclty of course) and establish conditions for a new American century. It is an outstanding idea that is so good that one must only conclude that human lack of understanding of economics is the only reason it rarely exists in any country in the world.
I’m not as eloquent as I wish I could be.
I’m intending to say this: I’m willing to exchange a corporate tax on profit in exchange for giving all of those bailout goodies (etc).
Btw, I’m a KD fan, so I want this whole house of cards to fall right now. I know it will result in great turmoil and pain. The alternative of a decade of misery is far worse.
Maybe it’s just me, but I’d rather suffer pain all at once, knowing health will follow.
I’m tired of these turkeys peeing on my head and telling me it’s raining.
I didn’t think you were advocating the other taxes, just facing the reality of the political situation.
My tendency is to believe that the long-term effects of the deep pain of a recession could be far worse than the drawn-out effects of slower growth. A depression after a collapse is a certainty whereas the alternative is not.
Moreover, the results of the last Depression outside of the US were so catastrophic as to make a decade of poor economic growth look like a cakewalk. Don’t forget your history or assume that very bad economic times will quickly pass without political reprecussions.
If you don’t like the left-ward tilt of the current POTUS, you would certainly be loath to see the direction the world moved in with 25% unemployment in the US and worse elsewhere.
But my solution is better than the current Liberal/Progressive failed one that continues to increase unemployment. In the words of the Progressives, yours is a "do nothing" approach.
I maintain my view that like JFK, a bold tax cut can break a nation out of a recession. Increased taxes under Obama can bring us a depression.
BYE
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.