• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 35
  • Last Modified:

Jobs Bill

Obama is blaming Republicans, but it's the Democrats in the Senate blocking Obama's jobs bill.

Why do Democrats not support it?


Durbin says Democrats don’t currently have the votes for Obama jobs bill
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/184713-durbin-says-democrats-dont-currently-have-the-votes-for-obama-jobs-bill


Harry Reid stops vote on Obama's jobs bill.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/oct/4/senate-democrats-forced-block-obama-jobs-bill/
0
carsRST
Asked:
carsRST
  • 7
  • 7
  • 4
  • +3
5 Solutions
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
Harry Reid dislikes Obama's jobs bill so much, that he's implementing the nuclear option to prevent a vote on it.



McConnell had threatened such a motion to force a vote on the original version of President Obama’s jobs package, which many Democrats don’t like
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/186133-reid-triggers-nuclear-option-to-change-senate-rules-and-prohibit-post-cloture-filibusters
0
 
BigRatCommented:
>>Why do Democrats not support it?

Not all Democrats believe that raising taxes won't have an adverse effect on the ecomony. Moreover many are dependant on middle class voters who are afraid that the taxation won't be enough and they will be eventually have to pay more. That makes many incumbants think twice, particularly as they can blame the Tea party anyway.

>>but it's the Democrats in the Senate blocking Obama's jobs bill

They are not "blocking" it, they are just not 100% in favour of it. If there were 100% in favour, the Republicans would be actually blocking it.

0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
>>They are not "blocking" it, they are just not 100% in favour of it. If there were 100% in favour, the Republicans would be actually blocking it

Obama has asked for this jobs bill to be passed as is.  The Senate Minority leader (a republican) was pushing for that vote, but Harry Reid blocked it.
0
[Webinar] Cloud and Mobile-First Strategy

Maybe you’ve fully adopted the cloud since the beginning. Or maybe you started with on-prem resources but are pursuing a “cloud and mobile first” strategy. Getting to that end state has its challenges. Discover how to build out a 100% cloud and mobile IT strategy in this webinar.

 
BigRatCommented:
It was interesting, in light of the next bank bailout (again) (Dexia), to hear Obama's comments on the Greek/Euro situation; Obama wanting a solution (not a proposal) within four weeks. The only way America can start to live within its means is to export more and since China is near on impossible that means more to the EU. To do this the dollar must fall against the Euro, or better said, if the Euro crisis was solved the Euro would rise against the dollar. This would make European high-tec exports (particularly from Germany) more expensive over their American rivals.

If the American ecomony is as resilient as they say (although I have my doubts on that) it may be a far better strategy than the jobs bill. A Euro at two dollars would make a very attractive market for luxuary goods, a market that the Chinese would find hard to satisfy.
0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
>>The only way America can start to live within its means is to export more

How about these ideas...

1.  Cut expenses
2.  Increase tax revenue by putting more people back to work.  How?  Less regulation (dodd-frank, sarbanes oxley, strip EPA of power), lower tax rates on investment income
3.  Export more (agree with you)
4.  More right to work states
5.  Eliminate public sector unions
0
 
leonstrykerCommented:
> A Euro at two dollars would make a very attractive market for luxuary goods, a market that the Chinese would find hard to satisfy.

Never going to happen. Currency manipulations only have affect then done by one side. As soon as a major currency begins to depreciate to any great degree the world banks will begin to intervene to stop that. Why would the EU want to be flooded with cheap US luxury goods from the US?

Global economy is a closed system someone has to be in a deficit.
0
 
BigRatCommented:
>>Global economy is a closed system someone has to be in a deficit.

But not for 25 years!

>>Why would the EU want to be flooded with cheap US luxury goods from the US?

Well, I was only thing of doing you a favour, but if you don't want to.....

>>As soon as a major currency begins to depreciate to any great degree the world banks will begin to intervene to stop that

It didn't happen with the Euro which started at par with the dollar and is running currently ate 1,33. In fact before the so called Euro crisis it was running at 1,45. In fact the current banks crisis has shown that they are incapable of stopping the rot, where the rot has set in. In fact in the nineties with the EU Snake, one currency after another went out as speculators played around, the national banks being powerless to save each currency. Only finally with the combined efforts of the German and French national banks was the French Franc saved from exiting the Snake. It is in America's interest to have a strong Euro, so I don't see America helping to stop it.

>>  Less regulation

It is precisely this, and if you check E-E I was complaining about this BEFORE the banks crashed, which caused overspeculation and a bank crash. If you want to ruin your environment by abolishing things like the EPA that's fine by me, after all it's your country. The only problem is you won't find a consensus for it and that is precisely the problem you are in. It is all very well for Tea Party activists to talk about Adam Smith economics, which frankly are completely out of date and don't apply to a modern industrialised society (one reason for EPA), but it is another thing to convinced ENOUGH people to get them applied.

You seem to be convinced that rich people "earning" money on investment will place that earned money in further investments and this will somehow create jobs. Jobs are created by demand which comes either from expansion of existing busnisess or by creating new ones, which means either creating better quality/cheaper products ie: competitive products, or new products that other people have never had. America was paryticularly good at the latter, Germany for example on the quality.

The problem is in both cases the returns are relatively marginal, if not with new business risky, where as the speculative market, betting on bonds, furtures are the like, can bring in far better returns. And one sees this today, as the speculators have moved off into food commodities and futures.

As far as your other proposals are concerned they are pure Thatcherism: When she came to power she insisted on an M3 monetary policy which caused one third  of British manufacturing to go bust. the problem is very simple, because the government is such a large player in the ecomony, if she stops buying everybody else gets a cold. Her anti-union stance caused enormous strife and social unrest such that the economy took years to recover out of the M3 position. In fact the UK became a service economy which lasted until those being serviced - the banks - went bust just recently. The UK now must refind it's manufacturing capabilites to pay for its imports, and to do so the government has drastically increased taxation and cut social security as well as various government expenses.

It was exactly Thatcher's non-consensus politics that cause a long hard period in the UK (some fourteen years) whilst Reaganomics - borrowing on the future - ran rampant in the US.

Therefore raise taxation and cut social security both for the better off and borrow money (which is still cheap in the US) to invest in the future. I'd avoid social strife at all costs and concentrate on turing the balance of imports around.
0
 
TlingitCommented:
>>Jobs are created by demand which comes either from expansion of existing busnisess or by creating new ones

Where do companies get their money to expand or create new businesses or jobs?  Through lower taxes.  Let Warren Buffett and his cronies, if they want to contribute more to the government then let them write a check to the IRS.  Why don't they just do that quietly.

>>which means either creating better quality/cheaper products

The only way for companies to do this is by deregulating them.  For every regulation you impose on them to make a product, the value and cost to make that product goes up, hence, it is then passed onto the consumer.  If they don't then they either go out of business, move to a more friendly state, or out of the country.
0
 
TlingitCommented:
>>Jobs are created by demand which comes either from expansion of existing busnisess or by creating new ones

Where do companies get their money to expand or create new businesses or jobs?  Through lower taxes.  Let Warren Buffett and his cronies, if they want to contribute more to the government then let them write a check to the IRS.  Why don't they just do that quietly.

>>which means either creating better quality/cheaper products

The only way for companies to do this is by deregulating them.  For every regulation you impose on them to make a product, the value and cost to make that product goes up, hence, it is then passed onto the consumer.  If they don't then they either go out of business, move to a more friendly state, or out of the country.
0
 
Anthony RussoCommented:
>>Let Warren Buffett and his cronies, if they want to contribute more to the government then let them write a check to the IRS.  Why don't they just do that quietly.

Conservatives always say that if the rich want to pay more then why don't they just do it and stop asking to have taxes raised. This frustrates me because it is like asking "If you want to renovate the high school then just do it." One person no matter how rich throwing money at it isn't going to do the job and would be just throwing money away. If everyone gave more it would be worthy though.

>>The only way for companies to do this is by deregulating them.

Another great argument, and entirely true as well. You can get a much cheaper hot dog if it wasn't regulated. I'm sure you won't mind pulling a few rat hairs out of your teeth when you eat it either. Regulations are needed and cannot be eliminated.

(Before the expected response) >>The free market will make that hot dog vendor go out of business.

In that example yes, but if it is about the dumping of waste from their factory in a river, it won't affect sales at all, and the river is ruined while the company can flourish.
0
 
TlingitCommented:
>>Conservatives always say that if the rich want to pay more then why don't they just do it and stop asking to have taxes raised. This frustrates me because it is like asking "If you want to renovate the high school then just do it."

That is exactly the conservatives point of view.  Why raise taxes on us when that money is going to be wasted?  There is nothing stopping Warren Buffett from cutting a check to the IRS, so just do it.  My argument is Mr. Buffett wants to pay more taxes, or does he?  If he really wants to pay more taxes, then just cut the check.  If he says he does but doesn't cut the the check, then he really wants to keep his money and let everybody else cut the check, in which case he is not concerned about taxes and looking out for the little guy, instead he wants a bigger and more powerful government.  I don't want to get in and read the mind of Mr. Buffett, obvisously he is very successful at what he does, but he does not speak for all the rich and wealthy in America.  In fact he is retracting on President Obama's Buffett rule, which tells me he is not pleased with how it is applied by the administration.
0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
>>My argument is Mr. Buffett wants to pay more taxes, or does he?  If he really wants to pay more taxes, then just cut the check.  I

Dead on.



>>Regulations are needed and cannot be eliminated.

Like regulating goat herding?  (I know...we've hit that one a few times).

0
 
leonstrykerCommented:
>>Global economy is a closed system someone has to be in a deficit.
>But not for 25 years!

Sure, what other market do you see supporting as much growth as occured in teh last 25 years in places like China?

>>Why would the EU want to be flooded with cheap US luxury goods from the US?
>Well, I was only thing of doing you a favour, but if you don't want to.....

Oh, I would love that to happen, but realist enough to know that its a pipe dream.

>>As soon as a major currency begins to depreciate to any great degree the world banks will begin to intervene to stop that
> It didn't happen with the Euro which started at par with the dollar and is running currently ate 1,33. In fact before the so called Euro crisis it was running at 1,45.

The Euro's natural rate was considered to be at 1.27 when I was studying its implementation in 1990. The rise from that level has been slow progress, not what you are suggesting now. Besides what would happen to Chinnese yuan at the same time? Either it would loose value to maintain parrity, in which case Europe would quickly be swamped by Chinese goods, or it would maintain parrity with Euro, in which case Chinese exports to the US would die a quick death. No way Chinese would stand for that.
0
 
Anthony RussoCommented:
>> If he says he does but doesn't cut the the check, then he really wants to keep his money and let everybody else cut the check,

No, what these rich people want when they ask for taxes to be raised on them is for everyone rich, including themselves (but not just them) to pay into the system more so it actually matters.
0
 
TlingitCommented:
>>No, what these rich people want when they ask for taxes to be raised on them is for everyone rich, including themselves (but not just them) to pay into the system more so it actually matters.

But it doesn't matter.  Even Mr. Buffett says if you tax the ultra wealthy it won't help pay down the debt.  If you confiscated all the money the wealthy have it won't even make a dent.  Plus not all rich and wealthy Americans want their taxes raised.  I think the only one is Mr. Buffett and he is speaking for everyone, or trying to, so let him, here it comes, cut the damn check!
0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
>> I think the only one is Mr. Buffett and he is speaking for everyone, or trying to, so let him, here it comes, cut the damn check!

What's funny is even Buffett himself doesn't support the "Buffett rule"

Warren Buffett Does Not Endorse WH's "Buffett Rule"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/30/warren_buffett_does_not_endorse_buffett_rule.html



Nor does Buffett like Obama demonizing corporate jets:
http://mrctv.org/videos/warren-buffett-not-fan-obama%E2%80%99s-corporate-jet-rhetoric
0
 
BigRatCommented:
>>Global economy is a closed system someone has to be in a deficit.
>But not for 25 years!

>Sure,....

I'm not sure you're with me. It is the US which has been running the trade debt.

>>Besides what would happen to Chinnese yuan at the same time? Either it would loose value to maintain parrity, in which case Europe would quickly be swamped by Chinese goods, or it would maintain parrity with Euro, in which case Chinese exports to the US would die a quick death. No way Chinese would stand for that.

I'm not even sure what this is meant to say. Chinese goods are indeed cheap, but that is hardly the point. The point is that a country has to balance its trade position, and that Europe, maily through Germany does, and which the United States has seem to have given up. The point is you either have to have manufactures which are pricewise (China) or of quality (Europe). The US, as far as I can see, has no hope of competing on price and therefore must make quality manufactures. But I don't see a climate for this, rather a sort of get rich quick type of Thatcherism, insisting on low taxation for the wealthy who speculate, rather than for those who invest.

>>What's funny is even Buffett himself doesn't support the "Buffett rule"

I wish yiou'd be more accurate. He doesn't support the White House's usage of the term.
Your second link is not to a serious news site, but to a rant forum.


0
 
leonstrykerCommented:
>I'm not even sure what this is meant to say. Chinese goods are indeed cheap, but that is hardly the point. The point is that a country has to balance its trade position, and that Europe, maily through Germany does, and which the United States has seem to have given up.

What you are not seeing is that the world currencies are tied together thru the exchange rates. Lets take a simple example here of USD-EUR-YUAN. You can not greatly affect the rate of USD to EUR without it having an impact on the YUAN. Devaluation of the USD in the order of $2 to e1 would have tremendous impact on the  Chinese economy. First of all their holdings of US Treasuries would now be worth 40% less and the US would most likely half its imports of Chinese goods unless the value of YUAN also decreases in respect to EUR.
0
 
BigRatCommented:
>>First of all their holdings of US Treasuries would now be worth 40% less and the US would most likely half its imports of Chinese goods unless the value of YUAN also decreases in respect to EUR.

Of course, that is why the Chinese are still buying US treasuries and artificially holding the Yuan to the dollar. It also makes German cars and technology more expensive in China which is exactly what they want. The US has made various bleetings about the Yuan being re-valued, but to no avail. It is only the Chinese who continually buy US stocks which keeps the interest there so low. They are banking on the US bouncing back. The question is, as I have stated before, is the US economy that resilient?
0
 
leonstrykerCommented:
Which why your idea of devaluing USD is a pipe dream.
0
 
BigRatCommented:
I'm not the one that's doing it. You're quite capable of doing it yourself. I'm just predicting the event.
0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:

 In President Barack Obama's sales pitch for his jobs bill, there are two versions of reality: The one in his speeches and the one actually unfolding in Washington.

When Obama accuses Republicans of standing in the way of his nearly $450 billion plan, he ignores the fact that his own party has struggled to unite behind the proposal.

When the president says Republicans haven't explained what they oppose in the plan, he skips over the fact that Republicans who control the House actually have done that in detail.


http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/spin-meter-obama-disconnects-1197664.html
0
 
BigRatCommented:
Tsk, tsk, what bad reporting. When Erica Werner writes "When the president says Republicans haven't explained what they oppose in the plan, he skips over the fact that Republicans who control the House actually have done that in detail." without actually quoting somebody, she is presenting information as fact and consequently MUST name her resource. She has presented her opinion as if it were news fact, and that from Associated Press. H.L.Menken must be turning in his grave.
0
 
carsRSTAuthor Commented:
I believe Obama's jobs bill speech was on 9/8/2011, yet he still can't get Democrats to support it.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/186635-democrats-scramble-to-save-face-on-jobs-bill

Democratic leaders in the Senate are scrambling to avoid defections on President Obama’s jobs package

A handful of Democrats are undecided or leaning no on the bill.
0
 
Mujtaba_Alam_KhanCommented:
The answer is simple, just like Republicans, Some Democratic are in support of those Corporations and the rich people who Obama wants to Tax. They are all the same.

-Muj ;-|
0

Featured Post

Free Tool: ZipGrep

ZipGrep is a utility that can list and search zip (.war, .ear, .jar, etc) archives for text patterns, without the need to extract the archive's contents.

One of a set of tools we're offering as a way to say thank you for being a part of the community.

  • 7
  • 7
  • 4
  • +3
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now