The Obamanation

[TheMercenary]

I guess I could rehire my wife and kids. Take the $5000 tax break for each of them and fire them at the end of the year when the break goes away.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

So your only plan is to let the tax cuts to the top bracket extend beyond the original expiration date in the law (the end of 2010)...How did those 01 and 03 tax cuts (at a cost of over $1 trillion) help the economy?

It keeps the money where it belongs, in the hands of those who earned it and out of the hands of Big Government who will waste it on things that will not work to create jobs or attempt to do them inefficiently as the last Stimulus Package did. Your guys tried to tempt us with that smoke screen once already telling us that you are going to make jobs. You failed. You don't deserve more of my money to fail again.

So you really dont have a plan or anything constructive to offer....other than dont tax the rich even though the law under which those tax cuts were enacted mandate that they expire in 2010....and dont attempt to create jobs, since your economic expertise says that wont work.

More of the same... if is counter to your opinion......it fails.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

... as a matter of fact all you ever say is everybody else is wrong.

Its OK...didnt expect anything different.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

So you really dont have a plan or anything constructive to offer.

Oh. Maybe you need to re-read my post. Leave the tax breaks in place where money earned stays with those who know best what to do with them. Stop lying to the American public about what you are doing with our money and how your Kabuki Theater plans are going to do something they will not.

To date you and your party have not offered anything constructive to fix the situation we are in. Ok, wait. You did significantly increase the Debt Ceiling so you could spend more and drive the economy down more. You told us that you were going to make more jobs and you didn't. The electorate is on to you.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Oh. Maybe you need to re-read my post. Leave the tax breaks in place where money earned stays with those who know best what to do with them...

And how well did that work out?

How did those 01 and 03 tax cuts weighted heavily to the top bracket, at a cost of over $1 trillion, contribute to middle class economic security, as promised?

BTW, numerous economists, including the lead economist at Heritage and other conservative economists have acknowledged that the stimulus plan has contributed to the GDP growth in 09...the first real growth in nearly three years. The consensus among economists across the political spectrum have agreed.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

And how well did that work out? How did those 01 and 03 tax cuts, at a cost of over $1 trillion, contribute to middle class economic security, as promised?

Better yet, how did it fail?

Unemployment rate 2001 =4.7

Unemployment rate 2003 =6.0

Unemployment rate 2006 =4.6

Unemployment rate 2010 =10

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

BTW, numerous economists, including the lead economist at Heritage and other conservative economists, have agreed that the stimulus plan has contributed to the GDP growth this year...the first growth in more than three years. The consensus among economists across the political spectrum have agreed.

And numerous economists have also said that the blip at the end of the year was not sustainable and artificially reflected tax dollars that were poured into the failed Stimulus Package of Feb 2009. No one has said that the growth in GDP noted in one or two months of this year is refective of long term economic outlook. But they all have said it is artificial.

Hey..,Economists across the spectrum understand that employment is the last to recovery from a severe recession.

You start with growing the economy...and that has occurred for the first time in 2 years, as a result, in part, of the stimulus program.

And you still have offered nothing better and still cant explain how those 01 and 03 tax cuts at a cost of $1 trillion helped the middle class?

[TheMercenary]

And this is your plan? You don't see a difference????

Even with Bush's tax cuts, federal revenues in 2007 were at the average as a percentage of GDP, 18.5 percent, going back to 1960. The deficit was just 1.2 percent of GDP, historically on the low side. Accumulated federal debt was 36 percent of GDP.

Obama proposes that the federal government spend over 25 percent of GDP in 2011, compared to a historical average of around 20.5 percent. He justifies this as necessary to continue to fight the recession.

Obama, however, projects that the recession will be fully over in 2011 and robust growth under way. Yet he proposes that federal spending continue to be nearly 24 percent of GDP through 2020.

In other words, rather than wind down the additional recession spending after recovery, Obama is proposing that it simply become a new, higher base.

After the World War II debt was reduced, accumulated federal debt never exceeded 50 percent of GDP until 2009, when it reached 53 percent. Under Obama's recommendations it would grow to 77 percent by 2020.

If Obama were to recommend a path to return spending to its historical share of economic output, in 2020 the deficit would be just $255 billion, about what the federal government spends each year on large capital projects, and just 1 percent of GDP. In other words, not a problem. And federal spending would have still increased by more than 4 percent a year since 2008.

Instead, Obama recommends a 2020 deficit of over $1 trillion and a troubling 4.2 percent of GDP.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...lt_100150.html

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

You start with growing the economy...and that has occurred for the first time in 2 years, as a result, in part, of the stimulus program.

You fail to recognize that most of the economists say it is an artifical recovery boistered by unsustainable spending.

And you still have offered nothing better and still cant explain how those 01 and 03 tax cuts at a cost of $1 trillion helped the middle class?

And you can't show where they hurt. We had more than half of the rate of unemployment at that time and people were doing fine. Anything to keep hard earned money out of the government coffers and in the pockets of those who earn it, who can make jobs with it, and put it directly back into the economy is a better plan than giving it to your party to spend whorishly on plans that have not to date and will not work. Well other than to raise our national debt.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

You fail to recognize that most of the economists say it is an artifical recovery boistered by unsustainable spending..

In fact, only the most conservative, supply side economists say that.

Many economists across the spectrum see the value of the stimulus plan, but disagree on the finer points.

So, in the end, your plan is more tax cuts and deficit reduction...and that, somehow, will create jobs.

Those 01 and 03 tax cuts failed to stimulate any economic growth and contributed $1 trillion to the debt.

You want more of the same and I want a different approach and I am willing to give it time to work, given that it was envisioned as a two year plan and that it has already contributed to economic growth.

*shrug* We'll just agree to disagree.

[TheMercenary]

Trillion dollar deficits are not a solution to our financial well being as a nation. The debt has nearly doubled since Jan of 09.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

In fact, only the most conservative, supply side economists say that.

Many economists across the spectrum see the value of the stimulus plan, but disagree on the finer points.

So, in the end, your plan is more tax cuts and deficit reduction...and that, somehow, will create jobs.

Those 01 and 03 tax cuts failed to stimulate any economic growth and contributed $1 trillion to the debt.

You want more of the same and I want a different approach and I am willing to give it time to work, given that it was envisioned as a two year plan and that it has already contributed to economic growth.

*shrug* We'll just agree to disagree.

But yet you still fail to note that the economists say the economic growth is artificial and only reflects the billions that we have poured into debt spending? Why do you ignore this fact and pretend like everything is ok? Your plan is not working.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Better yet, how did it fail?

Looking at that, Clinton apparently had the best plan.

2009 9.3%
2008 08BM 5.8%
2007 08BM 4.6%
2006 08BM 4.6%
2005 08BM 5.1%
2004 5.5%
2003 6.0%
2002 5.8%
2001 4.7%
2000 4.0%
1999 4.2%
1998 4.5%
1997 4.9%
1996 5.4%
1995 5.6%
1994 6.1%
1993 6.9%
1992 7.5%
1991 6.8%
1990 5.6%
1989 5.3%
1988 5.5%
1987 6.2%
1986 7.0%
1985 7.2%
1984 7.5%
1983 9.6%
1982 9.7%
1981 7.6%
1980 7.1%

http://www.nidataplus.com/lfeus1.htm#annl

Although, the 2008 data is skewed because of the benchmark thing (08BM). If you look at the monthly data, in same link, the rise of unemployment under Obama was a pretty steady transition from Bush so logically its not valid to say that the rise in unemployment is Obama's fault, as it has steadied out in the past three months. You can't blame the parachute if you open it twenty feet from the ground.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Trillion dollar deficits are not a solution to our financial well being as a nation. The debt has nearly doubled since Jan of 09.

I agree..but something had to be done or the economy would have tanked even more, leading to potentially the worst depression in 75 years....very few dispute that fact....and objective observers understand that correcting a failing economy cannot happen overnight..or even in one year.

And all the critics still havent offered a better plan.