Obama doesn't want Americans wasting money in Vegas

[Taro T]

The irony here is just... I don't know. It's in the air, I guess. Part of the reason for the 'ramming' and 'bribing' 'having the backs of' is that no matter what the President says, people like you in Congress kill him for it, rather than standing up and saying "Hey, that makes sense, I agree with this". I mean, that just makes sense, right? You buy that, don't you?

 

Right now, here, today (ok yesterday), you're killing the President for saying "Hey, we need to tackle the deficit". By doing so, you're giving your own leaders political cover for voting 'No' on things like creating a bi-partisan commission to make recommendations on potentially raising taxes and lowering spending in an effort to tackle the very problem that has you so fired up that you'll go to a message board and start a topic and reply several times in a thread about.

 

Don't you find that odd?

As KT stated, people aren't slamming the Pres for saying "Hey, we need to tackle the deficit." They're slamming him for saying we need to tackle the deficit while proposing a budget w/ well over a $1T deficit which includes new spending not covered by his "freeze", said freeze coming a year after he blew the previous year's ridiculous amount of spending right out the window. People are slamming his words for not even being minutely correlated to his actions.

 

I'd love to see him actually become financially responsible but I don't see any way that happens; at least not in 2010.

Well... that's not really how it works, is it? You don't just expand to expand, or contract to contract. You only expand if the marginal contribution of that one employee is worth more than their cost to you, but whatever. This is like pointing out that something is a tax credit and not a tax cut when the difference in meaning related to the conversation is minimal, if at all.

 

This will help many small businesses that are on the margins. You are correct (imo) in saying that if you definitely aren't going to expand, then this does nothing. However, if you're one of these companies that thinks 'maybe it's a good idea, I'm not sure, maybe it's not' then this tax credit might be the thing to put them over the top on hiring someone. Or do you think that there are no companies out there in this position?

I don't see where a one time $5,000 reduction in employee cost will do much to sway the businesses over to making that additional hire. It will sway some, but as LA states, the majority of companies that will take advantage of the $5k are companies that were going to hire anyway.

 

Basically, Obama's saying "hey, you were going to hire anyway, here's $5k; remember that name O-B-A-M-A in '12."

[Magox]

This is just insane, LA. How can you possibly be against this? Tax cuts for small businesses. This is what I'm talking about... My sense is that you're against this solely because it came from President Obama's mouth. This type of thing is exactly what you're looking for, isn't it?

 

Can you explain to me why you're against this?

The $5000 tax credit is hardly enough incentive for a company to want to go out and hire a new employee. Companies are not going to decide to start hiring because of a measly $5000 tax credit specially considering credit contraction conditions, home depreciation levels, extremely high unemployment, a muted consumer and much uncertainty regarding tax policy, possible health insurance mandates and consumer regulations. Estimates range that one out of every ten new hirees will be cause of the $5000 tax credit. Which means in all actuality that each new hiree would come at a REAL cost of $50,000 taxpayer money. Very similar to the Cash for CLunkers program.

 

Waste of government money.

[IDBillzFan]

Well... that's not really how it works, is it? You don't just expand to expand, or contract to contract. You only expand if the marginal contribution of that one employee is worth more than their cost to you, but whatever.

We agree, but for some reason, you're missing the fact that you're pointing out. You expand if it pays for itself to the extent there is a profit. If my business is good, I expand. If it's flat, I don't, and getting a $5000 tax credit is not likely to incent me to make a hire while I'm in a flat sales cycle. To suggest otherwise underscores a lack of understanding of what it takes (and costs) to put someone on your payroll.

 

Right now, people are simply saving more than they're spending. When people spend less, there is less demand for my goods. If you want me to hire, don't give ME the $5000. Give it to the people. Let people take home more...and by more I don't mean $13 per paycheck. Give them a significant tax cut, which would increase their spending. When people spend, demand for goods increase. When demands for my products increase, I hire to meet the expansion. Now you have more people on payroll, meaning more people are paying taxes, and suddenly more people are self-sufficient and the government can stop with handouts and focus on providing the basic services they were put in place to provide.

 

People aren't completely stupid. They see the insane spending in DC right now and understand they are going to have to pay for it; either in higher taxes, or fees passed on to them by the small businesses that are being taxed (the $200K and above earners, which are generally small business owners). When people are afraid as they are right now, they don't spend...they save.

 

Stop the spending, especially on all the stupid stuff masked as "stimulus," give the people a tax vacation or significant break, and let the market heal itself.

[pBills]

It's always funny to me when I hear the argument of "It's only been a year" or "It's been less than a year" and "You need to give him more time," as if we agree with his policies, just not the speed in which they will work successfully. You need not be a conservative to realize that the administration's understanding on how to fix the economy and unemployment is, at best, ridiculous. Yes, it may give that occasional bump that makes things appear like they're working. I mean, how great is it that unemployment is at 9.7%, even though we shed another 20,000 jobs? Even Obama came out and said this was "encouraging!" So we should be encouraged that more people are giving up? Awesome!

 

The reason you hear people groaning about this administration is not solely because we're eager to piss and moan (though, admittedly, many of us WILL piss and moan for the sake of pissing and moaning). We're groaning because funding pet projects to people who supported your campaign is NOT a way to stimulate the economy and put it on firmer ground. We're groaning because you don't need a degree from Harvard to understand that offering small businesses a $5,000 credit to hire someone is NOT how you address the unemployment rate. If fact, it should be embarrassing to EVERYONE in government who thinks this is a good idea in the current climate.

 

It's like watching a horror B movie where the scantily-clad coed is walking toward a room where she just heard her girfriend screaming bloody murder. The right is yelling at the screen " Don't go in that room! Don't do it!" and the left is sitting back saying "Y'know, you need to be patient and see what happens when the door opens."

 

And the easy response to that (since I have to get back shoveling) is it's easy to demand and B word and moan about every single thing, simply ignoring the fact that the parties are the problem. Not Obama. Dems for just listening to the people, the majority. The republicans for doing nothing except saying NO and work the strategy of being obstructionists.

 

Now any person in their right mind would not blame him for all of the problems we are going though right now. Fact is a lot of had started before he took office. And yes, only 20,000 job loss IS encouraging. Would you rather have 200,000 like it has been in the past? No one can expect the mess that is our economy will be turned around in less than a year. It took many years, many problems to get here - it is equally going to take a long time to dig out of this problem.

 

I am quite sure if it was anyone else but Obama you would be giving them some time.

[/dev/null]

I am quite sure if it was anyone else but Obama you would be giving them some time.

 

I'm sorry to interrupt your slap fight, but that last line is something I've been hearing more and more lately.

 

Why don't you stop tip toeing around what you're trying to say and just say it?

[DC Tom]

I am quite sure if it was anyone else but Obama you would be giving them some time.

 

We would...but he's black.

[pBills]

We would...but he's black.

 

 

 

hahaha. wrong and funny at the same time.

[pBills]

I'm sorry to interrupt your slap fight, but that last line is something I've been hearing more and more lately.

 

Why don't you stop tip toeing around what you're trying to say and just say it?

 

 

Ok, it funny as hell that people are were never quick to judge moves the prior eight years. And now, every single move that is made they complain about. Hard to hear your complaints when you couldn't complain before. I was complaining then and I am complaining now.

[KD in CA]

Ok, it funny as hell that people are were never quick to judge moves the prior eight years. And now, every single move that is made they complain about. Hard to hear your complaints when you couldn't complain before. I was complaining then and I am complaining now.

 

People didn't judge the Bush administration??

 

Where have you been?

[pBills]

People didn't judge the Bush administration??

 

Where have you been?

 

If it happened on this board... I would have to take as a half-hearted post. This board is SOOOO to the right it's ridiculous. Although, now that I said that I'm sure the "I'm an independent" will come out.

[IDBillzFan]

And the easy response to that (since I have to get back shoveling) is it's easy to demand and B word and moan about every single thing, simply ignoring the fact that the parties are the problem. Not Obama. Dems for just listening to the people, the majority. The republicans for doing nothing except saying NO and work the strategy of being obstructionists.

 

Now any person in their right mind would not blame him for all of the problems we are going though right now. Fact is a lot of had started before he took office. And yes, only 20,000 job loss IS encouraging. Would you rather have 200,000 like it has been in the past? No one can expect the mess that is our economy will be turned around in less than a year. It took many years, many problems to get here - it is equally going to take a long time to dig out of this problem.

 

I am quite sure if it was anyone else but Obama you would be giving them some time.

I'm not sure what world is encouraged by an unemployment number that drops simply because the number of people who stopped looking for work increased dramatically. But I guess as long as the number lowers, who cares about all those people who aren't accounted for in that number, right?

 

It's also funny that the GOP is labeled the obstructionist party of no when, in case you missed it, the Democrats have owned the entire government for the past 12 months. So if the GOP is the "Party of No," I expect that means the Democrats are the "Party of Nothing But Spending" because after an entire year dominating both houses, the party has accomplished precisely that: nothing but more spending. Health care? Nothing. Gitmo closed? Nothing. Unemployment under 8%? Nothing. Transparency? Nothing.

 

Nothing but spending. If you think "more time" is going to fix what this administration is doing, I have a delta smelt farm in Northern California I'd like to sell you.

[Alaska Darin]

You think so, however, I am like a lot of people fed up with government as a whole. With that being said I am willing to give the Obama Administration more than a year to get things done. Not to simply attack him and their plans every step of the way.

Despite the fact that to date he's done nothing differently than those who came before him. I'm sure that will stop any day now.

[Alaska Darin]

If it happened on this board... I would have to take as a half-hearted post. This board is SOOOO to the right it's ridiculous. Although, now that I said that I'm sure the "I'm an independent" will come out.

Feel free to go find another board where your "tried and true" lefty ideals will take you to the promised land.

 

I always find it funny when one of you lefty apologists automatically makes everyone against you into a "righty". The fact of the matter is "independents" and others have little or nothing in common with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Mr. Obama, Ted Kennedy, etc. That doesn't automatically make them Republicans - but it does make them smarter than you are.

[pBills]

I'm not sure what world is encouraged by an unemployment number that drops simply because the number of people who stopped looking for work increased dramatically. But I guess as long as the number lowers, who cares about all those people who aren't accounted for in that number, right?

 

It's also funny that the GOP is labeled the obstructionist party of no when, in case you missed it, the Democrats have owned the entire government for the past 12 months. So if the GOP is the "Party of No," I expect that means the Democrats are the "Party of Nothing But Spending" because after an entire year dominating both houses, the party has accomplished precisely that: nothing but more spending. Health care? Nothing. Gitmo closed? Nothing. Unemployment under 8%? Nothing. Transparency? Nothing.

 

Nothing but spending. If you think "more time" is going to fix what this administration is doing, I have a delta smelt farm in Northern California I'd like to sell you.

 

 

Who said people stopped looking for work? And why would anyone who really needs a job do that? The GOP is labeled the party of No for reason.... they ARE obstructionists. Hey should do well for them come election time - can't blame them for anything since they offered nothing. You act as though spending in government is a new thing? Give me a break on that. You really and honestly believe that ANY administration would have unemployment under 8% by now? If you do, you are a fool. It's going to take time. Spending will help things out, can help out the country with job creation... as long as it's done the correct way. Not saying that every spent is/has been right yet - I will not say everything is wrong like you and a lot of people will do.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pr...s/promise-kept/

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pr...s/in-the-works/

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pr...ulings/stalled/

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pr...promise-broken/

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pr...ngs/compromise/

 

Now with all of those postings, one must admit he is ambitious. Hopefully at least ONE President will be able to get true Healthcare Reform.

[Alaska Darin]

Who said people stopped looking for work?

It's Happening. It's ALWAYS happened.

 

Even the Canadians are reporting it.

 

I know it's hard to lose your man crush but try and follow along.

[pBills]

Feel free to go find another board where your "tried and true" lefty ideals will take you to the promised land.

 

I always find it funny when one of you lefty apologists automatically makes everyone against you into a "righty". The fact of the matter is "independents" and others have little or nothing in common with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Mr. Obama, Ted Kennedy, etc. That doesn't automatically make them Republicans - but it does make them smarter than you are.

 

 

Lefty aplogist.. very original. Let's face it you cheer on a party that does nothing, didn't do anything when they had control and do nothing when they don't have control Of course you will say that you are more towards the center and you dislike everything... offering no solutions does not make you very smart.

 

Personally I can not stand Pelosi or Reid. I have always thought they were bad for the Democratic Party. Shows how much of a DA you are now huh? Easy to label instead of actually understanding where the other person is with their beliefs.

 

You are soooo smart to assume.

[IDBillzFan]

Who said people stopped looking for work? And why would anyone who really needs a job do that? The GOP is labeled the party of No for reason.... they ARE obstructionists. Hey should do well for them come election time - can't blame them for anything since they offered nothing. You act as though spending in government is a new thing? Give me a break on that. You really and honestly believe that ANY administration would have unemployment under 8% by now? If you do, you are a fool. It's going to take time. Spending will help things out, can help out the country with job creation... as long as it's done the correct way. Not saying that every spent is/has been right yet - I will not say everything is wrong like you and a lot of people will do.

Okay...tell me...if people haven't stopped looking for work, how do you lose 20,000 jobs and have unemployment drop .3%? Can you explain that to me?

 

Next, with control of the house and senate, you believe that health care failed because of the GOP? If it was really what the people wanted, and it was such a great bill, how did the GOP stop it? You're sure it had nothing to do with backroom deals? Nothing to do with how pissed America was to watch our government shove a near-trillion dollar stimulus bill that virtually NO ONE read? But oh, that was the GOP's fault, right?

 

And speaking of stimulus, lest you forget, the administration sold the stimulus bill as necessary to keep unemployment under 8%, and scared the hell out of everyone by telling us that WITHOUT the stimulus bill, unemployment might get to 9.5%. So yes, THIS administration said it would keep unemployment at 8%, spent almost a trillion dollars to do so, and failed miserably.

 

Finally, I'm not acting like spending is a new thing. I'm pointing out that OBAMA himself said he needs to stop spending, and within 48 hours of his need to stop spending he watched the debt ceiling increase almost TWO TRILLION DOLLARS and began pushing a $100 Billion "jobs" bills. Real deficit hawk right there.

[GG]

If it happened on this board... I would have to take as a half-hearted post. This board is SOOOO to the right it's ridiculous. Although, now that I said that I'm sure the "I'm an independent" will come out.

 

Now that the honeymoon of the one year on the job training is wearing off, perhaps you can recognize that this board fairly well represents the US. About 20% are die hard liberals and 30% are die hard conservatives, with the rest independent but generally lean to the right given the long history of the population being wary of government intervention.

 

So I do find it enjoyable in the far left twisting in the wind in soul searching why nobody likes them anymore. I don't know how many times it needs to be explained that the 2006-2008 elections were a repudiation of the DeLay-Bush tactics than an embrace of the leftist ideals.

 

At the end of the day once you move away from "Bush Did It" mantra, the agenda gets amazingly hollow. And then you wonder why the majority of the population will have no more of it. I mean, when you lose Teddy Kennedy's seat to an unknown, it's not a wholehearted embrace that what you're doing is the right thing.

[jjamie12]

A couple of things before we can get back to the pbills bashing.

 

1- My central point here is that you shouldn't bash the President when you actually agree with what he's saying. You need to give him the political cover of actually agreeing with the guy (when you do agree) so that he can and will propose things you do agree with. Otherwise, he simply won't propose anything that 'right' thinking folks will agree with... I mean, why would he? If your'e going to get bashed from the right no matter what, why even try? In fact, we have this situation going on right now. There is genuine concern from folks on the right about the deficit. When President Obama proposed putting a bi-partisan commision together to come back and give recommendations on increasing taxes and decreasing spending (you know, cutting the deficit), not a single Senator voted for that. Not one. 97-0.

 

2- Not central to the main point in this thread, but wanted to point this out.

 

Magox said: "Estimates range that one out of every ten new hirees will be cause of the $5000 tax credit."

Great!

Assume:

Five year time horizon

Cost of funds for gov't (5 yr) @ 2.23%

Average unemployment benefit is $292 for 46 weeks (because of new laws put in place during times of financial strife... I think the normal time is 26 weeks)

Average real federal tax rate of 20.7%

Average salary: $32,140

 

To break even on the $5K: 11.421% of the 'stimulus' jobs created would have to have been ONLY because of the $5K. That is very close to the 1 in 10 Magox quoted earlier. So, if 'estimates' are off by 10% (ie. 2 out of every 10 jobs are solely based on the $5K stimulus): NPV for the gov't: $4,289.

 

This doesn't even take into account other good things (I wouldn't even really know how to estimate this impact) associated with having people employed like: Having them spending money on LA's widgets, or having them pay into state and local taxes or keeping them in their home instead of going to foreclosure or or or (you get the point)

 

(Note: I got the assumptions from the first links I opened from Googling "Average Taxes Paid in the US" and "Average Salary US" and "Average unemployment benefits". I did, literally, zero fact checking, so you may quibble with the numbers somewhat, but I think the essential point still stands up if you want to change some of the assumptions)

 

3-

To suggest otherwise underscores a lack of understanding of what it takes (and costs) to put someone on your payroll.

 

I swear to God, LA, not everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. You really aren't going to find anyone out there who is more pro-business than me. I'm not convinced about the $5K tax credit, but it seems ridiculous to just reject it out of hand (and the numbers seem to bear that out somewhat, no?) Especially considering it's exactly what people like you have been begging for! It's a small business tax credit for God's sake!

 

I'm going to start another thread specific to the $5K tax credit. I don't want to hijack this thread anymore. My main point here is stated in bullet 1. (And I don't really seem to be able to convince anyone of that, either!)

 

OK, back to pbills.

[IDBillzFan]

I swear to God, LA, not everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot.

This has nothing to do with disagreeing with me. It has to do with disagreeing with common freaking sense. I can only do this so slowly, but I'll give it one more shot.

 

I won't expand my business and hire anyone unless there is a greater demand for my product to offset the cost of the hire. And for what it's worth, it generally takes about a year for a new employee to pay for themselves.

 

There will not be a greater demand for my product unless people can buy it.

 

More people can't buy it if they're afraid of losing their job and taking their spare change and saving it.

 

Don't give my company $5000 to hire someone I don't need. Don't spend $800 billion on pet projects to pay off people who donated to Obama. Don't make taxpayers pay $24,000 per car in the Cunkers program. Don't make us pay $8000 per house to first time homebuyers to get a house they were going to get anyway. GIVE THAT MONEY BACK TO THE PEOPLE. And not the moronic $13 they get so they can fill their gas tank to the top this week. I'm talking about real money. A tax holiday. SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL. Give them money and they will spend it.

 

But no. We work on little blips. And by the way, it's easy to agree with what Obama says because all he does is say what you want to hear, so I WILL bash a president who one day says "lets reduce spending" and the next day pushes a second ($100 billion) stimulus disguised as a "jobs" bill. YOU should be pissed, too.