House Republicans on the hook for killing 1.6 million jobs

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07...ook-killing-1-6-million-jobs-fiscal-2014.html

This article is literally meaningless. The government could end unemployment tomorrow by creating a bunch of money to pay us all to be ditch diggers. Of course, a gross misallocation of wealth into jobs that produce nothing would cause the economy to go into depression.

The point being that creating jobs is meaningless, and anytime government spending gets cut, you could say that they're "killing jobs". It shouldn't be the goal of central economic planning to focus on creating jobs, but rather they ought to focus on increasing economic output and controlling inflation while maintaining fiscal responsibility (balance the budget). The jobs are a consequence of the economic growth, not the other way around.

This is basically what Milton Friedman told Congress to do for decades. Both Congress and the Fed followed Friedman's recipe in the 90s and look at how amazing the economy was. Inflation was low, the budget was balanced, the economy was booming, and the unemployment rate dropped significantly. But today they instead choose to pursue reckless fiscal insanity because they are either misguided or corrupt and cater to special interests.

We need to get our economy on the right track by balancing the budget and stop listening to looney economists like Paul Krugman who think that massive government debt spending to create jobs is the path to a permanent recovery.

 

The fed did not employ Friedman's recipe in the 1990's, they were still devaluing the dollar. The only reason the budget was balanced was because of an economic boom brought on by productivity improvements thanks to new widespread use of computers, internet, and cellphones. These technological advancements are the only reason the fed saw a balanced budget in 1999. You could say that it happened in spite of the government actions.

In fact i would argue if the government was more laid back and less in your face the economic boom would have been even larger. Instead they picked favorites, manipulated the market, and did their best to ensure money came their way to keep their jobs.

 

Isn't that what welfare is? The government subsidizing people who aren't making a living wage by taking it from the rich and giving it to the poor. Maybe if we make it standard practice that you either pay a living wage or your taxes will, maybe then we'll get some decent jobs?

 

Friedman's economic policies do not work in a free country. They require killing off large numbers of the poor and dissident who give the capitalist swine grief about paying a living wage. The only place his BS was ever put to the test, it came at the point of a bayonet.

He and his pig buddy Pinochet should have taken up something less harmful to the world, like stretching hemp.

What a miscarriage of justice that they didn't.

 

One of the main reasons the unemployment rate is high is because of racism. Rather than ensure equal opportunity in employment the guys running industry have participated in a wholesale plan to minimize the number of blacks they have to hire. So they have outsourced work to foreign countries. That reduces the number of domestic jobs for everyone overall but it really affects black people for a number of reasons. This was a major cause of Detroit's collapse. It is also true for numerous other industries.

Race affects everything in America.

 

Go look under the hood of a Chevy and tell me how many parts are stamped "Hecho in Mexico."

 

So they spent billions of dollars moving their operations overseas because they don't like black people that much?

- - - Updated - - -

You won't find too many stamped with "Made in Bulgaria" either. What's your point?

 

Like this?

 

It's not a free country when government takes money that I earn and gives it to deadbeat Obama voters on welfare.

My idea of a free country is one where I get to spend my earnings, you spend yours and never the twain shall meet.

 

Subsidize poverty??? I doubt that an author of fiction could've imagined a more topsy turvey approach to dealing with the problem.

 

"Race affects everything in America."

Taxcutter says:
When you are a hammer, all the world looks like a nail.

 

That's exactly right. Why do you think Repubs are trying to gut Social Security, pass anti-voting laws, close schools, eliminate the ACA, reduce unemployment insurance, cut food stamps, and countless other things that will make it harder to survive in America. It's all part of an ethnic cleansing program against black people. You will see more of it in the very near future as their efforts intensify.

 

So in your mind blacks can't survive unless they have about a dozen hands up...because they're too stupid???...what exactly?

 

WOW the free market worked, private investment drove new enterprises and created more efficiency in existing ones creating new and more jobs and that is the ONLY reason the budget was balance. Well it wasn't the only although a major one, the other reason was the lower of tax rates and the slowing of government spending increases and the reform of welfare that Gingrich and Kasich forced on Clinton. Classic Friedman policy.

- - - Updated - - -

Not only do they work better than any other policies in a free country they do best to free countries that aren't.

Yea that's how greedy capitalist get rich by killing off all the customers...........................fail.

 

I work in a wide variety on industries and blacks permeate at all levels. These myths about all the "guys running industry" are just that, they compete heavily for the best and most talented regardless of race so the others don't hire them.

- - - Updated - - -

Because it makes it easier to survive when you take responsibility for your own life and not depend on government to provide it for you by taking the earnings of someone else. And apparently I have more respect for minorities than you so I won't go into the racist remarks you made.

 

Sorry, but I think that's a silly and simplistic idea. A business owner isn't going to spend billions moving his business to a foreign country simply because he doesn't like black people. He's going to spend that kind of money because he/she believes that they will make more money overseas through decreased labor costs than they will here. There are places in the world now where doing business there allows for more profit. America has become a toxic place to do business thanks to ever increasing regulation, the ever increasing threat of additional taxes, and high levels of uncertainty thanks to unpopular legislation such as Obamacare.

Look at Texas. Over the past decade the state has successfully convinced thousands of California businesses to relocate there. Using your logic, we would have to blame racism and say that the business owners must not like Mexicans. Problem is, Texas also has a very high Mexican population, as well as more black people, when compared to California.

I don't see them trying to "gut social security". Unlike Democrats, Republicans have at least been willing to talk about the fact that Social Security is an unsustainable program and must be reformed if it is to survive in the future. Obama's own actuaries in these Administrations have said the same thing.

You mean requiring ID in order to vote? You have to show ID to go to one of Obama's fundraisers. If we want to have fair elections, it's probably better that convicted felons, illegal aliens, and multiple voters not be allowed to cheat. Of course, since these groups are more likely to vote Democrat, Democrats don't want the boat rocked.

Which schools? The ones who are failing to meet standards?

Because it's a horrible piece of legislation. Even Democrats are starting to realize it. The Teamsters union wrote a letter urging Congress to repeal it. Democrats in swing states convinced Obama to push back the "employer mandate" until 2015 (after the 2014 midterms) because they are afraid that they will be blamed for its colossal failure. Democrats better pray that Republicans defund this thing... otherwise the political fallout will be 100% attributed to the Democrat Party.

People said the same thing back when Clinton/Gingrich reformed welfare back in the 90's. Left wingers were outraged and went on their usual "poor starving people" type rants, yet what we saw is a 50% decrease in the welfare numbers, and millions of people went back to work. That was a huge boom to the economy.

If there is an ethnic cleansing program going on against blacks, it's from the Democrat party and their policies. Aborting themselves out of existence, staying dependent on welfare, inner city crime epidemics, allowing 10-20 million illegal aliens to be come citizens to compete with blacks for low skill jobs, etc.

 

Yes, the right always thinks facts are meaningless. And then rewrites history. The GOP created the debt and Clinton decided to pay for what was spent. It took a Democrat President to raise taxes and somewhat balanced the budget. Cutting spending and raising taxes really works. The right should try it some time.

 

Human nature is the real enemy, not capitalism. Besides what economic system do you suppose we use if we bail on capitalism.

Fun quote for you: "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." John Kenneth Galbraith

 

Your post rewrites history, its democrats and republicans who have given us this debt, it wasn't just one side. You can sit all day and argue about whose responsible for what percentage of it, instead of actually trying to figure out how to fix it. Ohh, And Clinton may have had a balanced budget but our total debt increased every year he was president so a whole lot of good that balanced budget did us... As for cutting spending and raising taxes works I agree, but Democrats have not proposed any real spending cuts at all, so maybe the left and right should both try it.

 

Clinton raised the top income tax bracket to 39%, a full 11% lower than where they were for the majority of Reagan's Presidency. Clinton also drastically lowered the capital gains tax, reformed welfare even though his left-wing base didn't want him to, and kept Government spending per GDP at 18.2%, which is the lowest it had been in 40 years. Combine that with the revenue generating anomaly known as the tech and dot com bubbles, and the increased efficiency in business that took place due to computers and the internet, it's no wonder we had a "balanced budget", even though the debt still increased every fiscal year that he was President.

 

You are right. I need to correct myself. It was under GOP presidencies, that the debt was created.

I have argued on how to fix it. I just don't lie about the causes.

Did you miss the word "somewhat" in my post? If Bush had not done a tax cut in his first year and if there was no 9/11, we would have had a surplus to cut the debt. I know 9/11 would still happen under Bush' watch but the tax cut was purely a choice. Every president was using the SS surplus to offset their spending unfortunately Obama came along when there was no SS surplus.

I disagree that Democrats have not proposed cuts (of course, the GOP just doesn't like them) but I agree that both sides should work together on both. The budget conference shows the real problem. The GOP will not go to conference unless the Democrats give up on taxes. That is not working together.

The GOP only proposes cuts that will hurt people. They even want to increase spending for their military complex buddies. That is unproductive but, at least, they should try and negotiate. They will not do that unless they can set the rules on what can be discussed.

 

Exactly the same idea of what a "Free Country" is , as the people who started this one.

WTF has happened?

 

The funds spent on welfare is nothing compared to the tax credits to businesses that moved most their operations overseas. The reason why Obama doesn't have triple digit surpluses for social security is due to the fact that so many jobs were lost as soon as he took office. The recession would have occurred under Bush after 9/11 so they created the housing bubble which created a false sense of security among businesses that everything was fine with the economy. They created this charade long enough where the full effects would be felt after Bush left office.

 

Yep, only Obama supporters receive benefits from social welfare programs.

 

Only Obama voters DEMAND an ever growing welfare state.

You are the architects of the mess America is in today.