• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

From November, 2005

fff

Well-known member
What's changed since 2005? Very little. The rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer and the middle class is struggling. It's a lie that rich Republicans want to keep going, but it is a lie. Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy, claiming they would create jobs. Where are those jobs?

BOSTON—As outrage in Congress stalls the Bush administration's attempts this Thanksgiving season to extend tax cuts that will primarily benefit the wealthy, a new study examines the administration's claim that tax cuts create jobs—and finds it without merit.

Evidence shows that, historically, changes in tax rates have no discernible effect on employment. Moreover, during the Bush administration, job creation since 2003 has fallen millions of jobs short of the administration's promises, and is significantly below what would normally be expected even without extraordinary economic stimulus.

"Contrary to what President Bush and his tax policymakers are saying, tax cuts do not automatically create jobs. Tax cuts are just one of many things that can affect job growth," said Liz Stanton, director of research at United for a Fair Economy (UFE) and a co-author of the report.

"President Bush's Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, far from delivering on the promises made to create 5.5 million new jobs, has carved out a new low in job recovery after a recession." said Scott Klinger, another co-author and director of UFE's tax policy group. "The president's tax-cutting policy is a failure in this regard, and we need to recognize it as such."

The report reviewed administration claims that "tax cuts create jobs" and found the following:

Reviewed over a six-decade period, changes in tax policy have not resulted definitively in job creation or job destruction; they have no predictable effect on jobs.

From June 2003 to December 2004, the administration promised its tax-cutting policy would create 5.5 million new jobs—but only 2.6 million were created, even though 4.1 million would have been expected without any special economic stimulus.

The weakness in job creation during an economic recovery that we are currently experiencing is unprecedented since World War II.

The number of good quality jobs (defined as those paying at least $16 an hour, providing employer-paid health insurance, and providing a pension) has remained flat at 25% of all workers.

Black employment is at 89.6%, compared to 95.2% for whites.

Latino workers average more than $10,000 per year less in earnings than whites, and the gap is increasing.

While there is no evidence that massive tax cuts create jobs, there is considerable evidence that they contribute to economy-choking deficits.

"No workers have really benefited from President Bush's tax policies, but blacks and Latinos have suffered disproportionately," said Gloribell Mota, bilingual education specialist at UFE.

"As the nation prepares for our annual feast of bounty and thanksgiving, many U.S. families will not be participating. This is because the multiple breadwinners each family needs these days don't all have jobs," said Anisha Desai, UFE's program director and a report co-author. "Of those that do, many are not making enough money to pay for turkey and trimmings for everybody in the family."

http://www.faireconomy.org/press_room/2005/report_no_correlation_between_bush_tax_cuts_and_job_creation
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Most jobs have gone off shore and there is very little that any government can do about it.

No matter how hard the governments of the western world tried - they could not keep the jobs at home - and for good reason.

The shareholders of major corporations demand profit and vote to approve the transfer to places like China and India and any other third world country willing to work its people hard.

If any of you hold - or did hold - shares in these corporations, you have actually had a hand in removing those jobs - demanding bigger and higher profits from the companies you invested in. All the time smiling as the value of your investment portfolio increased. And all the time countering every effort your government made to keep those jobs at home.

The share prices only fell because the oil folks got too greedy and forced the costs of energy so high it crushed the system. But ... those share values would have fallen anyways - as the economy and the dollar (pick your currency) could not keep this pace up forever.

No one government did this by itself - the general investment population had a big hand in it.

All the governments of the world could quadruple their "economic stimulus" and it will only delay the inevitable - that money will get spent and we will be back to today again.

Spending money - especially tax dollars will not and can not solve this issue - we have to allow it to all come out in the wash - the survivors will be the ones with the least amount of debt.

Going to be tough on some and some will get rich - just the way it is.

Blame any government you want - but to blame them exclusively simply shows ignorance.

BC
 

fff

Well-known member
Broke Cowboy said:
Most jobs have gone off shore and there is very little that any government can do about it.

The shareholders of major corporations demand profit and vote to approve the transfer to places like China and India.

If any of you have shares in these corporations, you have actually had a hand in removing those jobs - demanding bigger and higher profits from the companies you invested in. All the time smiling as the value of your investment portfolio increased.

They only fell because the oil folks got too greedy and forced the costs of energy so high it crushed the system.

No one government did this by itself - the general investment population had a big hand in it.

BC

:roll: Of course there's something the government can do about it. IMO, if a company moves their business offshore, they shouldn't be a US company anymore nor receive any of the benefits of being a US company.

And of course you're right: "no one government did this by itself."

I don't know what companies you're invested in, but my capital gains have been almost non-existent since George W. Bush took office.
 

mytfarms

Well-known member
fff said:
Broke Cowboy said:
Most jobs have gone off shore and there is very little that any government can do about it.

The shareholders of major corporations demand profit and vote to approve the transfer to places like China and India.

If any of you have shares in these corporations, you have actually had a hand in removing those jobs - demanding bigger and higher profits from the companies you invested in. All the time smiling as the value of your investment portfolio increased.

They only fell because the oil folks got too greedy and forced the costs of energy so high it crushed the system.

No one government did this by itself - the general investment population had a big hand in it.

BC

:roll: Of course there's something the government can do about it. IMO, if a company moves their business offshore, they shouldn't be a US company anymore nor receive any of the benefits of being a US company.

And of course you're right: "no one government did this by itself."

I don't know what companies you're invested in, but my capital gains have been almost non-existent since George W. Bush took office.

When someone says, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help", it's supposed to be funny. IMO, the government has their hands in too many things already. Less government and let the economy take its course. It's not "going to hell in a hand-basket". There are simply highs and lows. Some people need to learn that. Things aren't THAT bad.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
fff said:
Broke Cowboy said:
Most jobs have gone off shore and there is very little that any government can do about it.

The shareholders of major corporations demand profit and vote to approve the transfer to places like China and India.

If any of you have shares in these corporations, you have actually had a hand in removing those jobs - demanding bigger and higher profits from the companies you invested in. All the time smiling as the value of your investment portfolio increased.

They only fell because the oil folks got too greedy and forced the costs of energy so high it crushed the system.

No one government did this by itself - the general investment population had a big hand in it.

BC

:roll: Of course there's something the government can do about it. IMO, if a company moves their business offshore, they shouldn't be a US company anymore nor receive any of the benefits of being a US company.

And of course you're right: "no one government did this by itself."

I don't know what companies you're invested in, but my capital gains have been almost non-existent since George W. Bush took office.


Bad investments???
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Well fff - you need a new financial advisor - and you should have sold out about four months ago.

Like the smart folks did.

Anyone who invests has a responsibility to themselves as well as their country.

Unfortunately, the market runs on only two factors - fear and greed. Greed got us here - overriding the responsibility factor and fear will take us out - eventually.

No sense in blaming a political party for the entire enchilada - it is well beyond their control - always has been and always will be.

As for removing those rights as a company inside a country - that tends to make things even worse not better. And it truly discourages investment - which all companies need to move forward.

Imagine if major companies (who invest off shore) in the U.S. of A. lost their standing as American companies - they would leave - or raise prices. And then, what happens if no other outfit steps in to replace them.

Some of these companies literally invested billions into your economy in infrastructure, R&D, and many more and found they became less competitive and were unable to make profit without moving off shore.

It was the tax breaks that actually kept them here longer - to remove that would have made things even worse and twice as fast.

Remember - profit runs the program - so the investor him/herself had a big part in this.

It was quite obvious that the steam was rolling towards high pressure - every crash has been preceded by a frenzy - it is the frenzy that provides the warning.

I will not return your rolling eyes favour - I would simply suggest you change advisors - or get one if you have been running the show on your own.

Have a good one.

BC
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
ffff, "Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy..."

Bush gave big tax cuts to the very bottom of taxpayers, too. You Libs always seem to overlook that.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
ffff, "Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy..."

Bush gave big tax cuts to the very bottom of taxpayers, too. You Libs always seem to overlook that.

fff forgets everbody got a tax cut.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
Sandhusker said:
ffff, "Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy..."

Bush gave big tax cuts to the very bottom of taxpayers, too. You Libs always seem to overlook that.

fff forgets everbody got a tax cut.

She didn't know it. Obama didn't know it. It wasn't mentioned on Huffington.
 

alice

Well-known member
Here's something else from around that time that's had come to light today.

Since I don't cut and paste I'm printing the link. It kinda shines a different light on Bush's culpability in the mortgage crisis...in other words, he shares in it greatly.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081201/ap_on_bi_ge/meltdown_ignored_warnings

Alice
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
ffff, "Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy..."

Bush gave big tax cuts to the very bottom of taxpayers, too. You Libs always seem to overlook that.

It amazes me that folks who pay nothing in income tax, get a "return".

Husker, Only Republicans got the stimulus checks :D ffffff is a Dem so they were excluded :D
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Sandhusker said:
ffff, "Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy..."

Bush gave big tax cuts to the very bottom of taxpayers, too. You Libs always seem to overlook that.

It amazes me that folks who pay nothing in income tax, get a "return".

Husker, Only Republicans got the stimulus checks :D ffffff is a Dem so they were excluded :D

His was probably applied to back taxes, penalties and interest due. :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
fff
IMO, if a company moves their business offshore, they shouldn't be a US company anymore nor receive any of the benefits of being a US company.

instead of looking at the "benefit" of being an American company.. (which seem to be very few since Clinton signed Nafta)..

what are the penalties of not being an American company ?..
Lower corporate taxes..
non existant terrifs to import to the US
less regulations
lower wages
no union interferance
Few legacy costs

gee there seems to be no penalties.. and all the reward$..

<sarcasm>your right fff,... unless there is a benefit to being an American corp,.... Obama might as well drive the last few out</sarcasm>... . :roll: :roll:

I guess the big question fff is "What benefit is there to being an American corp today?"
 

lazy ace

Well-known member
fff said:
What's changed since 2005? Very little. The rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer and the middle class is struggling. It's a lie that rich Republicans want to keep going, but it is a lie. Bush gave big tax cuts to the wealthy, claiming they would create jobs. Where are those jobs.


If nothing has changed since 2005 then I would look at who took over control of congress in 2006 and tell those people to get off there worthless buts and earn there keep. :wink: But it is easier to blame Bush isn't it. :lol:

have a cold one

lazy ace
 
Top