Breaks for corporations, but not enough for workers

The Indianapolis Star ^ | November 23, 2002 | James Patterson

[Willie Green]

Let us pray that the thousands of people who are losing their jobs in a stagnant economy have planned for hard times ahead. If they haven't prepared, let us pray, again, they have a well-to-do uncle whose name isn't Sam.

[Willie Green]

Related thread: U.S. firms moving more assets offshore

[F.J. Mitchell]

Just shows you how times have improved since the 1929 to 1932 depression. Today, despite what the liberal democrats would have us believe is a similar depression-a large majority of the citizens, live in homes with at least one indoor toilet, with at least one TV set, central air and heat, Refrigerator, deep freezer, microwave, sound system, VCR, a PC or two, an IRA and savings account, two cars in the driveway, Washer, dryer, dish washer, riding mower, leaf blower, snow blower, rototiller, Camcorder, etc., etc.

In the old original depression-there was no middle class. THere was major unemployment among the laboring class, and they mostly rented the place where they resided, and the toilet was out back, cold water was available inside for very few-forget hot water. Electricity was a luxery that few homes were blessed with.

THis present so called depression, is the stuff that fantacies were made of during the real depression. THere was not one Citizen of the USA in those days who was filthy rich enough to enjoy the comfort that the lowliest of todays whiners, pretend to be suffering through.

[RAT Patrol]

but military spending must not take a higher priority than the welfare of the American worker. Otherwise, if too many people are out of work, the government will have even less revenue to pay off the deficit and finance war making. Um, dead doesn't do much for the American worker either.

Also, what is this "if too many people are out of work" comment mean in this context? If they're getting extended unemployment benefits, aren't they already out of work, not earning tax revenue, and just diverting money from paying off the deficit and financing the war on terror?

I read this guy with some regularity. He's a nice guy but his emotions are getting in the way of the facts on this one.

[RAT Patrol]

Yes, but shhhhh....no one has been taught that history.

[Ciexyz]

It's a lousy economy no matter how you cut it. I'm afraid to check the rate on my Preferred Investment Account.

[motzman]

If the GOP was smart, they would immediately pass at least a 5-week extension of benefits. The costs aren't really that high and will be absorbed by the economic growth that will occur over the next two years.

Besides, the cost are more than worth it, considering that the Democrats will lose yet another issue to challenge the Republicans with.

[Moonman62]

The war on terrorism ate up much of the surplus, but military spending must not take a higher priority than the welfare of the American worker. Otherwise, if too many people are out of work, the government will have even less revenue to pay off the deficit and finance war making.

The American worker, a euphemism for the proletariet in this article. I wonder who the author thinks provides most of he jobs in this country.

[Moonman62]

People who have been laid off and are desperately looking for work can find little solace in the gibberish spewed forth from crusty old supply-side hawks, who keep saying an economic turnaround is right around the corner.

Actually, this crusty old supply-side hawk has been complaining that President Bush hasn't been practicing supply-side economics at all, and that's why our economy is lagging, although I must admit that people like Larry Kudlow have put their principles aside to do some partisan cheerleading lately.

[sarcasm]

. Though new applications for unemployment insurance fell by 25,000 to 376,000 for the week ending Nov. 16

The week ending November 16th included a holiday - unemployment offices were closed.

[Moonman62]

If the GOP was smart, they would immediately pass at least a 5-week extension of benefits. The costs aren't really that high and will be absorbed by the economic growth that will occur over the next two years.

That economic growth isn't going to occur, if the tax cuts aren't accelerated and made permanent. The other possibilty is if the Bush administration slashes government regulations.

[Tripleplay]

And provide some incentives for "Business Investment"

[F.J. Mitchell]

LOL, Sorry, didn't mean to enlighten the history illeterates.