Where Have All the Lefties Gone?

[Magox]

I wonder how the landscape is for you. Are you pulling in $200K/year?

 

I haven't seen any numbers yet that tell me that profitable businesses are not hiring because of Obama's policies.

Yes, and my business isn't as affected by it because my product is in very high demand, actually much higher today than it was before the recession.

 

And to your second point, what sort of evidence are you looking for? Do you really believe that there is some sort of official statistic that gauges 'businesses are not hiring because of government policies"?

 

It's about common sense. If you are a small business owner you have to ask yourself:

 

What sort of new regulations are going to be in place over the next couple years and how will it affect my business?

 

If I terminate an employee who is doing poorly will I have to pay a portion of their health care bills and if so, for how long?

 

Are my clients subject to these new regulations, just like the "carried interest" tax? Which btw, you should read that thread, that is a prime example of how this will limit hiring.

 

Am I in the right business or are my clients in a politically unfavorable industry?

 

Will I have to provide insurance to all my employees with this new legislation and can I afford it?

 

How will the tax situation look like in 2011 and beyond, when I know that the government is going to have to do something to pay down this huge national debt? and considering that they are taxing upper income earners, how many more new taxes will they levy upon me? and if so, can I afford to hire more new workers?

 

How is this Cap and Trade going to effect my company directy and how will it effect my clients?

 

Its very simple, Until you know, you don't grow.

[The Big Cat]

Here's a good piece of business advice for you. 1 month is not a trend.

 

And here's some for you:

 

When a trend that has happened for 25 months suddenly ceases, but those 25 months are spilt 15 and 10 under two different watches, not only isn't the guy owning the latter portion responsible, as you orginally implied, but the un-trend that you pointed out carries much more weight than your partisan blinders allow you to acknowledge.

[Chef Jim]

And here's some for you:

 

When a trend that has happened for 25 months suddenly ceases, but those 25 months are spilt 15 and 10 under two different watches, not only isn't the guy owning the latter portion responsible, as you orginally implied, but the un-trend that you pointed out carries much more weight than your partisan blinders allow you to acknowledge.

 

Got ahold of some good **** this week didn't ya?

[EndZoneCrew]

My favorite lefties are Graham Lloyd and Paul Assenmacher.....nobody was better in a clutch lefty-lefty situation!

[murra]

And here's some for you:

 

When a trend that has happened for 25 months suddenly ceases, but those 25 months are spilt 15 and 10 under two different watches, not only isn't the guy owning the latter portion responsible, as you orginally implied, but the un-trend that you pointed out carries much more weight than your partisan blinders allow you to acknowledge.

 

 

Did you click on my link? Did you notice how the "trend" was mild under GW? His un-employment rates were slightly above average, and they were actually decent on par with his 8 year total. Obama's had a spike. A huge freaking spike. That is why you can't say the word FALSE next to "unemployment has risen". It has. You can't tell us that we haven't seen the news. If you'd like to browse further on that site, it gives a year-by-year total, which is neat because it shows that unemployment currently is at a 30 year high...not that NPR would explain that to you, since they're so unbiased and all.

[Magox]

I follow Bill Gross very closely, I happen to believe that he is one of the brightest economic minds in this world. He's the largest Bond manager in the world and consistently one of the top bond managers as well. I've talked about this before, but he has this saying which is "The New Normal"

 

'New Normal'

 

Officials at Pimco have forecast a "new normal" in the global economy that will include heightened government regulation, lower consumption, higher taxes and slower growth. The economy will likely expand at a 2 percent to 3 percent rate going forward, Gross said.

[IDBillzFan]

Yes but having lived thru a number of recessions we all know that hiring always lags. Always. The economy is not RECOVERED, it is RECOVERING. Things have to get better and stay that way for awhile before companies of any size are going to invest in hiring on more than an exception basis.

Simply repeating what I hear every liberal say in the media, that hiring always lags in a recession, doesn't mean it won't lag LONGER because of the policies and agendas. He's freezing the very hiring he needs to get re-elected. I'm at a point where I'm actually convinced that he would gladly be a one-termer if he can get government-run health care and cap-n-trade on the books because this adminitration and his stooges like Pelosi and Reid have convinced themselves (and only themselves) that such things would be historic, if only because people have been trying unsuccessfully to do it for so long.

[murra]

Simply repeating what I hear every liberal say in the media, that hiring always lags in a recession, doesn't mean it won't lag LONGER because of the policies and agendas. He's freezing the very hiring he needs to get re-elected. I'm at a point where I'm actually convinced that he would gladly be a one-termer if he can get government-run health care and cap-n-trade on the books because this adminitration and his stooges like Pelosi and Reid have convinced themselves (and only themselves) that such things would be historic, if only because people have been trying unsuccessfully to do it for so long.

 

Is that a popular thing to do? To talk about the fame/historic importance of a bill while you're lobbying to pass it? I mean I can see maybe some of the civil rights amendments, maybe someone said, "hey this thing is going to be remarkably historic", but that is just. For some reason I get the impression that they're all only trying to pass national healthcare to say that they've done it. I used to think that they were just crazy from believing that gov't run healthcare is constitutional, but now I think that they realize they're totally bypassing legitimacy in order to be part of a historic passage. It's as if they don't even care about its effects. Harry Reid, saying that opposition is on par with slavery, I mean really, they don't care about nationalized healthcare they just want to pass it, and look really good doing it.

[Adam]

Did you click on my link? Did you notice how the "trend" was mild under GW? His un-employment rates were slightly above average, and they were actually decent on par with his 8 year total. Obama's had a spike. A huge freaking spike. That is why you can't say the word FALSE next to "unemployment has risen". It has. You can't tell us that we haven't seen the news. If you'd like to browse further on that site, it gives a year-by-year total, which is neat because it shows that unemployment currently is at a 30 year high...not that NPR would explain that to you, since they're so unbiased and all.

An interesting side note (not aimed at you), the unemployment rate is not to the left or right, as Fox and MSNBC would have us believe!

[keepthefaith]

Again, not saying you're wrong, but your evidence is completely anecdotal. It's not very convincing if I need to take your word for it.

 

Incidentally, it's laughable to think that someone would do things to AVOID making more than $200K/year single or $250K/year married because they're scared of taxes. I do not have much sympathy for a person with such "problems".

 

Right, but how much taxation is too much? Upper bracket (federal only) in now 35% going to 39.6% plus another 5% for those over $1 million is possible if health care reform is passed. Add State tax (about 5% on average for the country) and you'll have people at or near 50%. You think that's OK? I don't. I think it embarrassing that we would ask anyone no matter how much they make to pay that much in taxes. It's plain wrong.

 

Business owners in the upper brackets will make changes to reduce costs if faced with a tax increase. Taxes are an expense like any other. They'll simply hire fewer people, pay them less, reduce benefits, etc.... What the Dems don't realize is that those on the lower end of the economic ladder are dependent on others for jobs. When you shoot the provider, you often hit the little guy. Obama's "bottom up" approach (his words, not mine) is a ridiculous strategy, and he is hurting his most loyal supporters by surrounding them in the social safety net. He is preventing them from being their best. He should be challenging them to do better. Instead he has given up on them and is basically telling them that they aren't good enough to do it themselves and that the government will have to step in. Very sad approach.

[IDBillzFan]

Business owners in the upper brackets will make changes to reduce costs if faced with a tax increase. Taxes are an expense like any other. They'll simply hire fewer people, pay them less, reduce benefits, etc....

Sorry, but that sounds anecdotal. So while there is no reason to doubt you, there is no reason to believe you. So let's keep spending our way out of debt and passing those costs to business owners until we come up with something more scientific.

 

NEXT!

[erynthered]

Sorry, but that sounds anecdotal. So while there is no reason to doubt you, there is no reason to believe you. So let's keep spending our way out of debt and passing those costs to business owners until we come up with something more scientific.

 

NEXT!

 

 

[keepthefaith]

I wonder how the landscape is for you. Are you pulling in $200K/year?

 

I haven't seen any numbers yet that tell me that profitable businesses are not hiring because of Obama's policies.

 

We're quite profitable. We've reduced our headcount 15%. We've cut overtime also. I've already met with all the employees and told them that if Health care is passed and we are taxed, they will have to begin to pay a portion of their premiums (today they pay zero, we pay 100%). I called my accountant and asked if there was anything in the Stimulus bill that would encourage us to hire, he said no, nothing. Anything that would encourage us to invest in equipment or training. No, nothing. The only thing we got from that was a 5 figure annual increase in our unemployment insurance rate and a property tax hike. We're battoning down the hatches because the looming or already in-place tax increases will raise our expenses significantly. Running a company is as much art as it is science. The art piece often comes down to "gut feels" on things. So you ask yourself, ho does it feel? It doesn't feel very good which usually means you play more defense than offense. Obama's ploicies and what business owners fear to be his future policies are stifiling to optimism and risk taking. That alone will slow our recovery.

[keepthefaith]

And here's some for you:

 

When a trend that has happened for 25 months suddenly ceases, but those 25 months are spilt 15 and 10 under two different watches, not only isn't the guy owning the latter portion responsible, as you orginally implied, but the un-trend that you pointed out carries much more weight than your partisan blinders allow you to acknowledge.

 

Would you care to wager that Unemployment will increase beyond 10.2% before the middle of next year?

[Chef Jim]

Right, but how much taxation is too much? Upper bracket (federal only) in now 35% going to 39.6% plus another 5% for those over $1 million is possible if health care reform is passed. Add State tax (about 5% on average for the country) and you'll have people at or near 50%. You think that's OK? I don't. I think it embarrassing that we would ask anyone no matter how much they make to pay that much in taxes. It's plain wrong.

 

Business owners in the upper brackets will make changes to reduce costs if faced with a tax increase. Taxes are an expense like any other. They'll simply hire fewer people, pay them less, reduce benefits, etc.... What the Dems don't realize is that those on the lower end of the economic ladder are dependent on others for jobs. When you shoot the provider, you often hit the little guy. Obama's "bottom up" approach (his words, not mine) is a ridiculous strategy, and he is hurting his most loyal supporters by surrounding them in the social safety net. He is preventing them from being their best. He should be challenging them to do better. Instead he has given up on them and is basically telling them that they aren't good enough to do it themselves and that the government will have to step in. Very sad approach.

 

[keepthefaith]

 

What don't you like about the 5% number?

[blzrul]

Simply repeating what I hear every liberal say in the media, that hiring always lags in a recession, doesn't mean it won't lag LONGER because of the policies and agendas. He's freezing the very hiring he needs to get re-elected. I'm at a point where I'm actually convinced that he would gladly be a one-termer if he can get government-run health care and cap-n-trade on the books because this adminitration and his stooges like Pelosi and Reid have convinced themselves (and only themselves) that such things would be historic, if only because people have been trying unsuccessfully to do it for so long.

And it doesn't mean it WILL lag longer. You don't know any better than I do when it will start. I do know that I got caught in a RIF in November, 2002 close to the beginning of a recoveryfrom the earlier recession and didn't see hiring really start to pick up in earnest until later in 2003. That recession started in 2000.

 

The first thing that happens is that layoffs slow. Then as things stablize hiring will gradually start and increase. The fact is this was a pretty bad recession.

 

While becoming President to do something egomanical, like topping an unpopular dictator or passing "landmark" legislation, is certainly within the realm of possibility, what are the odds we'd have TWO of them back to back. Go figure.

 

[The Big Cat]

Would you care to wager that Unemployment will increase beyond 10.2% before the middle of next year?

 

Would you believe it to be the sole responsibility of President Obama?

[Adam]

Would you believe it to be the sole responsibility of President Obama?

Yes, and it is Dick Jauron's fault that the Bills have stunk for 10 years

[keepthefaith]

Would you believe it to be the sole responsibility of President Obama?

 

No. Overall I think Presidents get to much credit or blame for the rise and fall of the economy. Far too much. However, if you approve a $787 billion expenditure, call it a "stimulus" and you have to borrow the money to do it, you better damn well be sure you'll get a return on the investment. Problem is that we won't get the return and it was obvious to most at the time that it was a poorly conceived plan. Health care is another poorly conceived plan. While Obama's heart is in the right place, he doesn't have the head for this type of business and it is business that he is doing. Don't let his speaking ability fool you. Functionally speaking he's a very inexperienced dummy.