Oct 8th, 2011
I've been arguing for quite some time that we have to raise taxes dramatically. The rabid devotion within both parties towards maintaining the lowest revenue rates in more than half a century are absurd. Howard Gleckman, of the the Tax Policy Center of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institutions, sees little reason to hope for better when the best proposal we've gotten, the American Jobs Act, is based around such ridiculous premises as this:
"Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid’s plan to fund a $445 billion stimulus, err, jobs bill with a 5.6 percent surtax on millionaires is not all bad. After all, Tax the Rich does make a nice campaign bumper-sticker. But it is mostly bad."
Agreed. Unless and until we restore rates to levels that correspond with sustainable government, we merely hasten our decline and our debt crisis.
"The idea, endorsed today by President Obama, would raise the average tax bill of those making a million or more by $110,000, the Tax Policy Center estimates. Almost nobody else would pay a nickel. What’s wrong with that, you might ask if you don’t happen to make a million. To start, it perpetuates the dangerous myth that we can address our fiscal problems by taxing only a handful of rich people. Unfortunately, as my Tax Policy Center colleagues showed so well a couple of years ago, we can’t. There are not enough of them– so their rates would have to be astronomically high (only about a half-million households will make a million or more in 2013).
Democrats now insist that somebody making $999,000 a year is in the struggling middle-class and needs to be protected from tax increases. It was ridiculous enough when President Obama decided that $200,000 ($250,000 for couples) defined middle class. It was even stranger when GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney adopted that number. Median household income in the U.S. is, um, $60,000. Sorry, but if we are going to get serious about the deficit, people making $200,000 (or even $100,000) have got to help out."
And it is this drop in the bucket from the wealthiest in America that Eric Cantor calls "dead on arrival."
Showing posts with label American Jobs Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Jobs Act. Show all posts
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Quote Of The Day - Bats**t Crazy Edition
Oct 5th, 2011
And we all thought his "terrorist" "anchor babies" pronouncements were nuts...
"This may be something nice he’s throwing out for gay folks that are living together so he can tell them actually you’re better off not getting married, because there’s a marriage penalty here…
If you’re the head of a single household, you have an exemptions at $225,000. All other cases $200,000. So it really penalizes married individuals…But if you want to get divorced it is good news for you…the good news if you’re thinking about divorce is you can actually get divorced and have $75,000 to $100,000 higher exception. And you can even live together! This is the president’s proposal — live together and you get a higher exception than if you’re married. Now of course the founders — they all understood marriage to be between a man and a woman."
-- Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) warning us all that the proposed American Jobs Act is actually a conspiracy to degrade and despoil traditional moral values.
ThinkProgress has video HERE if you don't believe me.
And we all thought his "terrorist" "anchor babies" pronouncements were nuts...
If you’re the head of a single household, you have an exemptions at $225,000. All other cases $200,000. So it really penalizes married individuals…But if you want to get divorced it is good news for you…the good news if you’re thinking about divorce is you can actually get divorced and have $75,000 to $100,000 higher exception. And you can even live together! This is the president’s proposal — live together and you get a higher exception than if you’re married. Now of course the founders — they all understood marriage to be between a man and a woman."
-- Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) warning us all that the proposed American Jobs Act is actually a conspiracy to degrade and despoil traditional moral values.
ThinkProgress has video HERE if you don't believe me.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Getting Back To "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"
Oct 1st, 2011
Krugman makes an accurate observation in his latestet critique of GOP obstructionism and self-delusion:
"The starting point for many claims that antibusiness policies are hurting the economy is the assertion that the sluggishness of the economy’s recovery from recession is unprecedented.
But, as a new paper by Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute documents at length, this is just not true. Extended periods of “jobless recovery” after recessions have been the rule for the past two decades. Indeed, private-sector job growth since the 2007-2009 recession has been better than it was after the 2001 recession."
I have pointed out, time and again, that job creation ended as we once knew it a decade ago. We are now, in fact, on track to add more jobs to the American economy in a single Obama term than were added under eight years of Bush II.
Krugman makes an accurate observation in his latestet critique of GOP obstructionism and self-delusion:
But, as a new paper by Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute documents at length, this is just not true. Extended periods of “jobless recovery” after recessions have been the rule for the past two decades. Indeed, private-sector job growth since the 2007-2009 recession has been better than it was after the 2001 recession."
I have pointed out, time and again, that job creation ended as we once knew it a decade ago. We are now, in fact, on track to add more jobs to the American economy in a single Obama term than were added under eight years of Bush II.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
An Interesting Proposal
Sept 14th, 2011
The Hill reports on one provision of the American Jobs Act:
"President Obama's American Jobs Act, which he presented to Congress on Monday, would make it illegal for employers to run advertisements saying that they will not consider unemployed workers, or to refuse to consider or hire people because they are unemployed.
The proposed language is found in a section of the bill titled "Prohibition of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of an Individual's Status as Unemployed." That section would also make it illegal for employers to request that employment agencies take into account a person's unemployed status."
Does this open a sticky conversation? Yes. Are the Republicans totally, wildly against it? Absolutely.
The Hill reports on one provision of the American Jobs Act:
"President Obama's American Jobs Act, which he presented to Congress on Monday, would make it illegal for employers to run advertisements saying that they will not consider unemployed workers, or to refuse to consider or hire people because they are unemployed.
The proposed language is found in a section of the bill titled "Prohibition of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of an Individual's Status as Unemployed." That section would also make it illegal for employers to request that employment agencies take into account a person's unemployed status."
Does this open a sticky conversation? Yes. Are the Republicans totally, wildly against it? Absolutely.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Stewart On The Jobs Bill Speech
Sept. 13th, 2011
The American Jobs Act is probably the best possible legislative proposal in the last two years to address what ails us. Nevertheless, Stewart has some justifiable fun. The money quote:
"Maybe Barack Obama could have done the whole "hit 'em where it hurts" thing before America slid into an unstoppable s**t spiral."
via The Daily Show
The American Jobs Act is probably the best possible legislative proposal in the last two years to address what ails us. Nevertheless, Stewart has some justifiable fun. The money quote:
"Maybe Barack Obama could have done the whole "hit 'em where it hurts" thing before America slid into an unstoppable s**t spiral."
via The Daily Show
Paying For The Jobs Bill
Sept 13th, 2011
The American Jobs Act doesn't stand much of a chance. The reasons for this are two fold:
First, it would actually help the country and the GOP's saboteurs (previously noted HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE) definitely can't have that. Second, it would rely on the rich getting some more "skin in the game."
The American Jobs Act doesn't stand much of a chance. The reasons for this are two fold:
First, it would actually help the country and the GOP's saboteurs (previously noted HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE) definitely can't have that. Second, it would rely on the rich getting some more "skin in the game."
 |
| via Washington Post |
Monday, September 12, 2011
GOP Sabotaging America, Ctd...
Sept, 12th 2011
Of course it's sabotage. Anyone who is still arguing that it's not is either lying to you or, worse, they are deceiving themselves. Yglesias shines the light:
"Marin Cogan and Jake Sherman have done the only reporting that really needs to be done on the prospects for major legislation aimed at creating jobs, or doing anything else:
This is the wealthiest federal legislature per capita since the late 1930s. I think that is becoming a serious issue. Let's face it, in the short term the worst that can actually happen to them is that they spend a few years slightly less rich. I think it is ironic for a party that continues to demonize the poor for not "having skin in the game" to have so little skin in the game.
Of course it's sabotage. Anyone who is still arguing that it's not is either lying to you or, worse, they are deceiving themselves. Yglesias shines the light:
"Marin Cogan and Jake Sherman have done the only reporting that really needs to be done on the prospects for major legislation aimed at creating jobs, or doing anything else:
"Obama is on the ropes; why do we appear ready to hand him a win?" said one senior House Republican aide who requested anonymity to discuss the matter freely.Public policy is not a zero-sum competition between “Republican ideas” and “Democratic ideas,” but electoral competition is a zero-sum battle for office. In a paradigm where the passage of major legislation counts as a “win” for President Obama then anyone who wants to see President Obama go down to defeat, then no major legislation can pass on a bipartisan basis. This is exactly the problem the White House had in trying to overcome GOP filibusters during the 111th Congress and the main problem they face in trying to reach bipartisan accords with the Republican-led House of Representatives in the 112th Congress. This is the fundamental reality of American politics today, but far too few people put it at the center of their accounts of what’s happening."
This is the wealthiest federal legislature per capita since the late 1930s. I think that is becoming a serious issue. Let's face it, in the short term the worst that can actually happen to them is that they spend a few years slightly less rich. I think it is ironic for a party that continues to demonize the poor for not "having skin in the game" to have so little skin in the game.
The Continuing Republican Disconnect
Sept 12th, 2011
Jacob Weisberg pretty much nails the current disconnect between the policy positions of elected Republicans and traditional economics:
"There is no question that the current Republican position is eccentric as a matter of economics. Pick up any standard economics textbook, and it will explain how governments respond to cyclical downturns with temporary deficit spending. In Keynesian terms, boosting aggregate demand increases GDP growth and reduces unemployment. Conversely, cutting government spending during a slowdown tends to make matters worse. There may be circumstances in which temporary spending isn't possible, or where cutting government spending does not have the typical contractionary effect. But a thorough IMF study conducted last year concluded that "fiscal consolidation" does tend to have the predictable impact: shrinking GDP and raising unemployment."
Unfortunately, the House GOP has already signaled its intention to do everything they can to keep the economy stagnant. In response to the release of the President's jobs bill, the full text of which is available HERE, Eric Cantor had this to say according to TPM:
"Anything that is akin to the stimulus bill I think is not going to be acceptable to the American people," Cantor told reporters at his weekly Capitol briefing Monday. "I don't believe that our members are going to be interested in pursuing that. I certainly am not."
Of course Mr. Cantor is not interested. However, Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's, is very interested and he put together this chart Mr. Cantor should read. It's unusual for Mr. Zandi to compose a graphic so simplistic it could be considered droll. Perhaps that's just what the GOP needs... economic cliff notes.
Jacob Weisberg pretty much nails the current disconnect between the policy positions of elected Republicans and traditional economics:
"There is no question that the current Republican position is eccentric as a matter of economics. Pick up any standard economics textbook, and it will explain how governments respond to cyclical downturns with temporary deficit spending. In Keynesian terms, boosting aggregate demand increases GDP growth and reduces unemployment. Conversely, cutting government spending during a slowdown tends to make matters worse. There may be circumstances in which temporary spending isn't possible, or where cutting government spending does not have the typical contractionary effect. But a thorough IMF study conducted last year concluded that "fiscal consolidation" does tend to have the predictable impact: shrinking GDP and raising unemployment."
Unfortunately, the House GOP has already signaled its intention to do everything they can to keep the economy stagnant. In response to the release of the President's jobs bill, the full text of which is available HERE, Eric Cantor had this to say according to TPM:
"Anything that is akin to the stimulus bill I think is not going to be acceptable to the American people," Cantor told reporters at his weekly Capitol briefing Monday. "I don't believe that our members are going to be interested in pursuing that. I certainly am not."
Of course Mr. Cantor is not interested. However, Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's, is very interested and he put together this chart Mr. Cantor should read. It's unusual for Mr. Zandi to compose a graphic so simplistic it could be considered droll. Perhaps that's just what the GOP needs... economic cliff notes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
