President Obama's Jobs Bill
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-09-13/president-obamas-jobs-bill
Yesterday President Obama urged Congress to pass his $447 billion jobs proposal with ‘no games, no politics, no delays”. It’s a plan that includes tax cuts for working Americans and small businesses. It also includes spending on teachers, schools, and infrastructure. President Obama says his plan will put people back to work and incorporates ideas from both the left and the right, but some Congressional Republicans raised immediate objections to plans to pay for the bill which include higher taxes on wealthier families. Join us to discuss the ongoing political struggle to find ways to spur job growth
Guests
Jared Bernstein
senior fellow, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; former chief economist and economic policy adviser for Vice President Biden.
Jonathan Weisman
White House reporter for "The Wall Street Journal."
Rea Hederman
senior policy analyst, The Heritage Foundation.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
"By most accounts (who's?!) the Recovery Act was in the right direction, but not enough "
I have just three words for you J ... "shovel ready jobs".
Whose? Pretty much every economic analyst I've heard on the subject. That is several, over the past couple years, most on this program, and at least a couple highly decorated. And speaking vaguely, public opinion. I'm not claiming there's no legit criticism of its implementation...
JSawyer wrote:
"Witness Germany, Canada, much of Europe - they have much more progressive tax systems - and boast much stronger employment and currencies (and housing)."
You forgot Greece and Spain.
@monte:
"You really have to wonder about a guy who is willing to do anything for a second term."
As opposed to wondering about an entire political party that is willing to throw the United States' credit rating under a bus to score political points? And, what pray tell is the Republican's solution? Oh, right, their solution to apparently everything at any given time: "less taxes, less government, less regulation," which translates to "screw the middle class, screw the law, and screw the environment."
m
It drvies me crazy when conservatives argue, "Well, if it couldn't pass when Democrats controlled the Senate, the House and the White House, it cannot be done now." The reason certain legislation could not pass when Democrats controlled all branches of government was that Republican senators would not let legislation get to the floor of the senate for a vote. Remember the filibuster? The point is that Republicans have been blocking Obama's legislation his entire term whether through Republican threat of filibuster in the Senate or Republican control of the House agenda. Why don't the American people understand that? Why don't other guests, commentators or Diane call conservatives on that argument every time it is made?
Ckc: Yes, they should. But one word every American should know: Greed
and maybe add 'boundless' to that.
Government can and does create jobs. Speaking of the Keynesian model - hard to disparage something that's mostly been compromised here..
@ecgberht:
You and the President, and 2/3 of the guests today don't get it. Businesses are uncertain about one thing and one thing only: DEMAND. Tax breaks don't do squat if there is no one buying your stuff on the other end. No sane business person will be inspired to hire under even a 0% tax rate (which is an insane idea if you want to live in a civilized society) if there is no demand for their business. The only thing that will happen is companies will stow away the savings, as they've been doing.
The President's Jobs Bill is equally fallacious in its thinking: why on earth would a business be inspired to hire an extra hand for a $24k/year liability for a mere $4K break? Better yet, why would a business hire anyone at all when they aren't getting demand to justify hiring an extra worker?
All the Republicans and Tea Party people who criticize Keynesian Economics don't realize that we haven't even engaged in Keynesian Economics yet! The much maligned "stimulus" bill was HALF tax breaks; that isn't going to stimulate demand. At best, we have only put forth $400 Billion in government spending in this economy, while we've spent over $2 Trillion on the Wall Street buffoons that got us in this mess.
Well, when you are limited to the views expressed in the NYT and MSNBC, it makes sense. There are other views out there than Paul Krugman's.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/06/08/the-stimulus-was-too-small-...
http://www.pbs.org/nbr/blog/2010/09/was_the_stimulus_too_small_som.html
This one includes some damning evidence:
http://cafehayek.com/2011/01/stimulus-too-small-nein.html
In short, when your religion is Keynesianism, facts don't matter. You will believe what you want to believe, even if the facts don't support it. These economic theories have failed. It's not the fault of the Congress or even the President it's the fault of the theories themselves. Now that we know, why would we continue to try to employ them.
Indeed- it's out of control. I believe in democracy but it is really bordering on shameful
Sam in Texas wrote:
"The much maligned "stimulus" bill was HALF tax breaks; that isn't going to stimulate demand."
Really? Putting more money in people's pockets to spend doesn't stimulate demand? That's a bit of revisionist history there , isn't it Sam? The mantra of the left in 2009 was essentially, "all spending is stimulative", therefore the more the better. Then, we have this classic blast from the past ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/01/pelosi-unemployment-checks-be...
@ecgberht:
"I tithe my income - not to my church, but to charities that help, in large part blacks, because most of the poor where I live are black.
How about you?
Now, am I stupid or racist?"
I just love you guys from the conservo-nonsensiclesiastic church of illogical arguments. I love the fact that you didn't actually address the issues that were brought up about the Tea Party candidates signing what appears from the comment to be racist declarations. I'm not saying that all Republicans and conservatives are racist, and I'm not saying that you are either, but , obviously it is not a thing that you care about much, because you are gladly affiliated with a party whose policies tend to be racist.
ecgberht wrote:
"That's a bit of revisionist history there , isn't it Sam? The mantra of the left in 2009 was essentially, "all spending is stimulative", therefore the more the better. Then, we have this classic blast from the past ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/01/pelosi-unemployment-checks-be..."
Wow, of all that I wrote, that's all you could pick up on.
So, let's dissect your comment: you didn't deny that over half of the stimulus bill was tax cuts. So, applying your logic, we've already tried the more tax cuts idea, and we should move to something else, like actual spending in the economy.
Here's the funny thing: you and I actually want the same thing. But, strangely, you can't seem to have a productive and thoughtful discussion on how to accomplish it because you're too busy attempting to score points, much like the rest of your party.
Sam in Texas wrote:
"but , obviously it is not a thing that you care about much, because you are gladly affiliated with a party whose policies tend to be racist."
I am a conservative first. A Republican second. I need only defend the views I take and what I say and do, not what somebody else says or does. Still, to say that Republican policies "tend to be racist" is not a defensible statement and to say that conservative policies are racist is a falsehood.
I'm not saying you're a racist either, Sam, but obviously it is not a thing that you care about much, because you are gladly affiliated with a party who fought the civil rights act in all it's incarnations. See how it works?
This is the danger of trying to paint a group of people with a broad brush. Not only is it not accurate, it's lazy. It's what one does when one has lost the argument - call the other guy a racist.
That's what Grady Lee Coward does. Sounds like that's ok with you.
Neither I, nor innocent commentators like kitty, are obligated or responsible to reply to bullies and persons who can't see how their reactionary positions and "in-print high-fiving" with admitted racist punks makes them racists, sexists, classists, fascists and violent nationalists. Look, if you want people to starve for food and die from medical neglect while you run some sordid scam to gain money unmolested then admit it and say so proudly. Don't hide behind the big prostate of Governor Perry and say it's the free market. There are plenty of laws and legislated fixes and trade associations to protect the wealth and income of the rich. Why can't regular workers have unions or anything else?
Poverty is powerlessness and deserves advocacy because our nation fosters a dynamic of structural violence for the benefit of the powerful. Verbal violence in opposition to justice on this site illustrates that dynamic.
Actually I am an actor who enjoys the attention generated by my unworthy opponents. It does dismay me you are so ignorant you mispell my well-known name. I may be a coward. If you were a disabled 55 year old mulatto dwarf like me (Properly: Little Person of Color) you might have some fears too in this terrified land.
"Here's the funny thing: you and I actually want the same thing. "
I doubt that.
As to the rest of what you wrote, I don't see much substance in there. Instead, you just bash "my party".
"you didn't deny that over half of the stimulus bill was tax cuts"
Just because I didn't speak to "tax cuts" doesn't mean I agree with the statement. In fact, the ARRA "tax cuts" weren't tax cuts at all - they were tax credits, and in some cases, outright handouts to non-income tax paying people. Tax cuts means that the marginal tax rates are cut. Those kinds of tax cuts have lasting effect. Tax credits don't ... and didn't.
"Neither I, nor innocent commentators like kitty, are obligated or responsible to reply to bullies and persons who can't see how their reactionary positions and "in-print high-fiving" with admitted racist punks makes them racists, sexists, classists, fascists and violent nationalists."
Well, look who crawled out from under his rock!
Still waiting for those "racist" posts - and now for the "high-fiving" with admitted racist punks posts too! You still think you can just fire out the charge without any evidence. Maybe you just "feel" we're racists?!
You really don't want to go there GLH - down the "gulit by association" road.
The President associates with un-repentent terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. Does that make him a terrorist?
And people like you who use half excuses, enuendo, and negores are my best friends do nothing for what I wrote about. Whenever anything is said about President Obama, it is applied to all of us as it has always been. You have a columnist who wrote that the founding fathers made a point of not creating a class system. How insulting is that ot black people? I did not say all and I am speaking of politicians. The fact that they can say my grandchildren would do better in 1860 is okay? The preaching and teachings of the mormon church vs the whining about Rev Wright's sermon, ok? You must have serious guilt issues. I spoke of specifics and you back door with generalities. I'm just not one of those black people who will take it. Name any of what I specified as not proof or go someplace for your bogus pulpit. Not to me. I know it when I hear it and I know it when I see it. I give to. My family alma mater is Grambling and we now have 4 generations of graduates starting with my dad's. I charge is and I will stand by it. Go tell it to the marines, my dad served in the navy, south pacific, 1944.
I am getting really sick and tired of your I tithe to help poor people, most of them black. My family. Parents were share croppers kids out of Louisiana. Moved to Cleveland in 1947 and they both had finished school. They bought their home in 1958 on a land grant because they were redlined. Period. Same for when my dad started his business. they have 5 girls and I am the oldest. We have no teen pregancies, druggies, criminals. we have seven children. Same. One left in school. Now, let me see, that's my sisters and I and our seven children. We ALL have degrees from in progress to masters. My oldest, my son, will get his degree in Graphic Engineering this Saturday. We did not need a dime from any of you.
Now my grandson is in school honors student in the 4th grade. Read Harry Potter at 5. His sister, 5, just started kdg but already reads on a 3rd grade level and just about worked her brothers whole 1st grade workbook in one sitting, Saturday. We needed you for no one thing. Yet, the right says my grandchildren would be better in 1860 and that is not racist? If not, I guess you agree with them. For the record. I lost my dad and my husband in 2003. If alive, today, my parents would have celebrated 64 yrs of marriage and I would have celebrated 40 this December.
Oh and I meant to tell you, I am a 62 yr old black woman, widow, three children by the same man, four grandchildren by my daughter and her husband. No matter what you say, whether you have the guts to admit it, wanting people the teaparty endorse to sign that black children would be better off in 1860 IS RACIST!!!!!! Yes, I yelled. I am so sick of the denial of this massive insult just because a black man is president.
Isn't it a fact. like Nixon prolonging the viet Nam Situation. Who died here?
pisces,
You have a lot of anger - and maybe with good reason.
I assumed you were a man and that was my mistake. Sorry.
"We needed you for no one thing."
The success your family has had shows what is right with America.
"Yet, the right says my grandchildren would be better in 1860 and that is not racist? If not, I guess you agree with them."
I'm not sure what that means. Seriously, I don't know what the "better off in 1860" is about. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
"And people like you who use half excuses, enuendo, and negores are my best friends do nothing for what I wrote about. "
I said and did none of those things. What do you want me to say? That racism is bad? My point was, to brand all people from one party or group with the words or actions of a few is unfair.
One of Diane's Greatest Shows, and why I love Diane so much. Finally, the most common sense questions asked that I have been waiting for so long:
* 15% tax rate loophole for hedge fund managers. This is not a tax increase on job creators.
* Subsidies for oil and gas
* Corporate welfare and tax loopholes places the corporate tax effective rate near the bottom of international tax rates. Corporate profits as a share of GDP are the HIGHEST ON RECORD.
* Dodd-Frank regulations don't impact small businesses.
* Most regulations don't impact small business. The only regulation the Heritage guy came up with is lead in toys.
* 62% of Americans realize the Greatest Recession was inherited from Bush
* Romney's Plan looks like a road map that got us into this mess.
* When in history was there certainty for business?
* Business is not waiting for this mythical certainty.
* No tax increase in 12 years and still no jobs.
* Tax revenues are the lowest since 1951.
"JSawyer wrote:
"Higher taxes on the rich only lead to higher prices"
Merely raising taxes wouldn't magically close loopholes, end government manipulation, and bring us a functioning progressive tax system. Witness Germany, Canada, much of Europe - they have much more progressive tax systems - and boast much stronger employment and currencies (and housing)."
Hey Sawyer:
Have you been checking lately on what has been taking place in Europe. Don't think the Germans or French will continue tax hike increases to keep the rest of Europe afloat. You will have civil unrest if this continues because it will be the individual workers in these countries paying for the Greece bailout.
By the way, Italy is in trouble and last week they refused to raise taxes on their top earners. Wonder why?
I know I'm labeled as a racist here and could not care less. As far as I see it to acknowledge reality makes you a racist, honest discussion is just not possible on the subject. There is plenty to dislike about the Obama presidency so it is possible to think he is a terrible president and be right and also hold an unfavorable opinion of what it is to be black in 2011.
I mentioned I managed commercial apartment rental property, to find white people or just about anyone else that were willing to rent apartments along side black tenants was next to impossible. I am sorry to inform those that are interested that the truth is most non black people find black culture and what it represents totally repugnant. When it comes to choosing an apartment to rent, people leave their so called broad minded liberalism at the curb.
"Sam in Texas wrote:
@monte:
"You really have to wonder about a guy who is willing to do anything for a second term."
As opposed to wondering about an entire political party that is willing to throw the United States' credit rating under a bus to score political points? And, what pray tell is the Republican's solution? Oh, right, their solution to apparently everything at any given time: "less taxes, less government, less regulation," which translates to "screw the middle class, screw the law, and screw the environment."
Hey Sam:
Your from Texas just like me. I heard some of the program this morning while on my way to Bastrop,Tx. I think it was Bernstein who said all conservatives wanted to do is cut taxes. But anyway,do you know that the regulation proposed by this administration is going to hurt the small independant driller? Drilling cost money and not every hole that is dug has black gold even with all the technology that is around. Small Drillers have to find investors which this administration wants to penalize by elimanating tax credit if empty holes are found. Then look at the regulations proposed by this inept Obama just to get permits. The Chevron and Exxons of this world don't do drilling anymore, they subcontract it out to these small independent businesses.
"cbmattick wrote:
It drvies me crazy when conservatives argue, "Well, if it couldn't pass when Democrats controlled the Senate, the House and the White House, it cannot be done now." The reason certain legislation could not pass when Democrats controlled all branches of government was that Republican senators would not let legislation get to the floor of the senate for a vote. Remember the filibuster"
cbmattick:
It was the individual Democratic Senators hearing from there own constituents that derailed alot of Obama legislation.
Remember the Health Reform Bill. It was passed on a technicality by the Democratic Congress. There were not enough Democratic Senators that supported the bill and this gimick was used to bypass the Senate so these Democratic Senators would not lose their seat in November 2010.
dlswriter wrote:
One of Diane's Greatest Shows, and why I love Diane so much. Finally, the most common sense questions asked that I have been waiting for so long:
* 15% tax rate loophole for hedge fund managers. This is not a tax increase on job creators. (They pay high taxes already)
* Subsidies for oil and gas (It is expensive to drill especially for small independants. Oil and Gas jobs are labor intensive & pay above wages)
* Corporate welfare and tax loopholes places the corporate tax effective rate near the bottom of international tax rates. Corporate profits as a share of GDP are the HIGHEST ON RECORD. (There could be some loop holes to close. Corporate Wealth drives GDP)
* Dodd-Frank regulations don't impact small businesses.
* Most regulations don't impact small business. The only regulation the Heritage guy came up with is lead in toys. (Try telling that to the small drillers in the Gulf of Mexico)
* 62% of Americans realize the Greatest Recession was inherited from Bush
(But Most people do not believe in Obama's ability)
* Romney's Plan looks like a road map that got us into this mess.(He would probably be a better leader than Obama)
* When in history was there certainty for business? (Never has been but during good economic times certainty increases not like today)
* Business is not waiting for this mythical certainty.(Never has)
* No tax increase in 12 years and still no jobs.(That guy from Michagan forgot to mention that Gov. Jennifer Grandhol increased state income tax)
(As a result unemployment went from 6% to 14%)
* Tax revenues are the lowest since 1951( Lot of People out of work means less SS, Payroll,etc taxes)
"ecgberht wrote:
ericwino wrote:
"Higher taxes on the rich only lead to higher prices"
You've grasped the simple concept that so many miss. I have posted on this here before. "Businesses don't pay taxes. Consumers do". It's a simple principle, but an absolute truism. When you raise taxes, consumers pay more. It's as simple as that.
September 13, 2011 - 10:52 am"
Then why haven't prices and Executive compensation fallen after a Half-Century of Tax cuts?
A Rhetorical Question that should be answerable, if you are determined to try, in 25 words or less that you used to justify your simple-minded banality above.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
"bkarl wrote:
American corporations are sitting on tons of capital, yet not hiring and investing, claiming "uncertainty". I think they're actually holding jobs for a ransom from the republican congress, which after all they fund, of favorable de-regulation. Just look at what's been said already by republicans about jobs, and watch what develops. In such a pivotal election year, the power of now unregulated corporate political money is enormous.
September 13, 2011 - 8:48 am"
Since WWII, the Inauguration of each new Republican President has been followed almost immediately by soaring unemployment. During all those years, I have not heard a single Republican complain about the business declines their Party has caused. They love unemployment and the misery it causes for Labor which they despise.
They have finally achieved their dream of permanent and appalling unemployment that can't be undone by the Democrat Administrations.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
The party line: Cut taxes for the rich, cut programs for everyone else (cut education, cut environmental stewardship, cut health care, cut social security), de-regulate, and lower the deficit--are the same brand of Herbert Hoover-George W Bush solutions that have led to a Great Depression and a great recession, ones that benefit a very small minority of wealthy power brokers to the detriment of everyone else. The true colors of the purveyors of this line are seen clearly when during a time when many suffer due to recession, they threaten to shut down government unless tax cuts are given to the wealthiest top 2%.
Cutting government not only cuts needed programs but also results in job loss (as one of the great employers of our people is infact government). Raising taxes on the very rich is pure revenue and will garner trillions and help reverse the 30 year widening in the gap between the rich (occupying about 10%) and everyone else. Withdrawing military from the middle east would help stem the tide of debt. And there should be a serious reconsideration of NAFTA which has helped send much of our industry abroad.
Two great books written from historic perspective (as opposed to ideologic orthodoxy) are "The Great Depression: America 1929-1941," by Robert McElvaine, and "The Age of Greed: The Triumph of Finance and the Decline of America 1970 to the present" by Jeff Madrick.