• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate advances jobs bill after collecting five GOP votes

marduc said:
I am sure that almost every unemployed person out there is hoping to find a job, and would much rather the government not have to butt in to accomplish this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't count on that.

They wanted the government to butt in, and thus the economy collapsed.

marduc said:
because unemployment is only a Democratic affliction, the Republicans can all take care of themselves, and are not out of work cuz they live in America.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that might be true. Certainly if I was going to lay people off I'd check the parking lot for Obama stickers.
 
danarhea said:
The Democrats garnered 5 Republican votes on this. One of those votes was Scott Brown. I am truly disappointed.

Here is my problem with the bill -

The Democrats want to give tax breaks to businesses for hiring workers. The problem here is that, if businesses hire workers for the tax break, when consumer demand is down, then the tax break is for nothing. It is a huge waste of taxpayer money, and nothing else. It's like a proposal, made decades ago, that we can bring ourselves out of a recession by paying workers at one company to build refrigerators, pay more workers to transport the refrigerators to another plant, where more workers are paid to destroy those refrigerators. This bill, sent to the floor by Harry Reid, is pure idiocy, and it looks like this idiocy is going to pass.

I am very surprised that even ONE Republican supported this government sponsored insanity, but FIVE?? WTF????

Article is here.
Click to expand...

I thought Republicans loved any excuse to cut taxes.....

Sorry, but you have a fatal flaw in your argument as the tax credits only partially subsidize hiring. No employer is going to make the hire unless they need the person. This credit only helps give the employer just a bit more confidence to make an investment decision that may need just the little extra push (lowering the cost in the cost/benefit analysis). It will not radically change the economics of any business decision. The employee, OTH, is off the public payroll (if previously unemployed) and paying taxes, presumably more than the credits given for his hire and spending money. I thought this was exactly what the Republicans wanted?

The Republicans did not vote FOR The measure, only that debate can proceed. They have been abusing the fillibuster to this point. Its good to see an instance where they are letting the work of congress proceed. Like the bill or not, it has sufficient merit for a good debate.

The use of the fillibuster to block everything from the Democrats is an abuse of power, and should be considered irresponsible at least (blocking the work of duly elected officials and failing to appropriately deal with the issues of the day) to treasonous at most (willfully putting US security and welfare at risk.)
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
...jesus christ. Tax breaks for small businesses, and Republicans are vehemently against it.

You really will convince yourself via any means possible that anything the democrats do is BAD!
Click to expand...

Tax breaks aren't going to improve the job market.
 
Deuce said:
...jesus christ. Tax breaks for small businesses, and Republicans are vehemently against it.

You really will convince yourself via any means possible that anything the democrats do is BAD!
Click to expand...

This is just a tax break for hiring people.

It doesn't do anything to increase demand, there is no reason to hire someone if you don't need them to do anything.
 
We have to consider the timing (and scope) of this bill. How long are the tax incentives going to last? At this point, firms are (if they are in operation) assuming highly liquid positions which begs for a major uptick in capital investment. Given the relatively low user cost of capital, such a tax break can give an improving job market some much needed momentum.
 
Why would I hire someone if my revenues are down, consumer spending is down, and taxes are threatening to rise on my most targetted customers?

I'm going to take on the expense of hiring someone just to get a tax break? LOLOLOLOLOL

The Dems need to take a remedial business course from a local D.C. community college.
 
Erod said:
Why would I hire someone if my revenues are down, consumer spending is down, and taxes are threatening to rise on my most targetted customers?

I'm going to take on the expense of hiring someone just to get a tax break? LOLOLOLOLOL

The Dems need to take a remedial business course from a local D.C. community college.
Click to expand...

LOL

A business course you say?

What does the rational firm (one focused on profits) do when it see's a rise in their marginal product of capital (worker productivity is increasing)?

What does a rational firm do when the cost of capital investment is at a record low?

What does a rational firm do when the marginal product of capital experiences diminishing returns?

At what point does a firm consider increasing labor: when strictly revenue increases or strictly profit increases?
 
upsideguy said:
The Republicans did not vote FOR The measure, only that debate can proceed.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

If the arguments against are convincing and with merit, the bill should fail.

If the arguments in favor are convincing and with merit, the bill should pass.
 
upsideguy said:
I thought Republicans loved any excuse to cut taxes.....

Sorry, but you have a fatal flaw in your argument as the tax credits only partially subsidize hiring. No employer is going to make the hire unless they need the person. This credit only helps give the employer just a bit more confidence to make an investment decision that may need just the little extra push (lowering the cost in the cost/benefit analysis). It will not radically change the economics of any business decision. The employee, OTH, is off the public payroll (if previously unemployed) and paying taxes, presumably more than the credits given for his hire and spending money. I thought this was exactly what the Republicans wanted?

The Republicans did not vote FOR The measure, only that debate can proceed. They have been abusing the fillibuster to this point. Its good to see an instance where they are letting the work of congress proceed. Like the bill or not, it has sufficient merit for a good debate.

The use of the fillibuster to block everything from the Democrats is an abuse of power, and should be considered irresponsible at least (blocking the work of duly elected officials and failing to appropriately deal with the issues of the day) to treasonous at most (willfully putting US security and welfare at risk.)
Click to expand...

Thank you.

I was reading through the thread, waiting for someone to explain the economics of tax incentives.

Scott Brown voted for what he believed is best for his constituents... and they don't live in Texas.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
We have to consider the timing (and scope) of this bill. How long are the tax incentives going to last? At this point, firms are (if they are in operation) assuming highly liquid positions which begs for a major uptick in capital investment. Given the relatively low user cost of capital, such a tax break can give an improving job market some much needed momentum.
Click to expand...

Companies aren't going to spend 30 g's, or more, on an employee they don't need just to get a 5 grand tax break.

Spending 30 grand to save 5 grand makes no sense.

If the company needs an employee, they'll hire him, tax break, or no tax break.

The worst part, is that this program will get gamed to no end. Companies will hire someone, keep him for the required amount of time, then lay him off just to get the tax break.

Statically speaking, this is going to be an unemployment disaster.
 
Last edited:
Erod said:
Why would I hire someone if my revenues are down, consumer spending is down, and taxes are threatening to rise on my most targetted customers?

I'm going to take on the expense of hiring someone just to get a tax break? LOLOLOLOLOL

The Dems need to take a remedial business course from a local D.C. community college.
Click to expand...

I don't know, why would you comment on somewhat complicated economic issues when you have no clue what you're talking about...:doh

Revenues are down across the board? FALSE.

Consumers are spending--just not with Credit Cards.

Taxes "threatening" to rise...?? You hyper-partisans will make that claim with any bill... You make more than $250K? Really?:cool:
 
Re: UPDATE 1-New U.S. senator helps Democrats advance jobs bill

no, no no. we get it. the party of no.

kudos to brown for doing what he was elected to do, advocate for his constituents.
 
Re: UPDATE 1-New U.S. senator helps Democrats advance jobs bill

liblady said:
no, no no. we get it. the party of no.

kudos to brown for doing what he was elected to do, advocate for his constituents.
Click to expand...

Thank God someone is saying no to crap like this. Somebody has to do it.
 
BWG said:
Exactly.

If the arguments against are convincing and with merit, the bill should fail.

If the arguments in favor are convincing and with merit, the bill should pass.
Click to expand...

If the bill is in violation of the Constitution it should fail, regardless of how wonderfully nice it would be.
 
apdst said:
Companies aren't going to spend 30 g's, or more, on an employee they don't need just to get a 5 grand tax break.
Click to expand...

When did I claim they would?

Spending 30 grand to save 5 grand makes no sense
Click to expand...

See above

If the company needs an employee, they'll hire him, tax break, or no tax break.
Click to expand...

Now we are getting somewhere. When the marginal product of capital > the user cost of capital, what does a firm do? Are they at their maximum profit potential?

The worst part, is that this program will get gamed to no end. Companies will hire someone, keep him for the required amount of time, then lay him off just to get the tax break.
Click to expand...

What if the required amount of time equates to them spending 30k? Where would the gaming occur?

Statically speaking, this is going to be an unemployment disaster.
Click to expand...

???
 
harry's bill is 15 bil

in our economy it might as well be 15 cents

the house version is 157B, for example

the point---harry's success is the passage of NOTHING

mere pennies

he might as well have done NIX

NO economic significance, good or bad, NO consequence will ensue from this stimulus which can't be called a stimulus

now, the POLITICS of it...

that MIGHT be something else

except it's hard to get too worked up either way over NOTHING

meanwhile:

NEW YORK (AP) -- A monthly poll showed consumers' confidence took a surprisingly sharp fall in February amid rising job worries. The decline ends three straight months of improvement and raises concerns about the economic recovery.

The Conference Board said Tuesday its Consumer Confidence Index fell almost 11 points to 46 in February, down from a revised 56.5 in January. Analysts were expecting only a slight decrease to 55.

The increasing pessimism is a big blow to hopes that consumer spending will power an economic recovery. Economists watch the confidence numbers closely because consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of U.S. economic activity.

The February reading is a long way from what's considered healthy: A reading above 90 means the economy is on solid footing. Above 100 signals strong growth.

The news sent stocks lower, overshadowing retailer reports that showed stronger holiday profits. The Dow Jones industrial average falling 74.29 points to 10,309.09 by midmorning.

One gauge, measuring consumers' assessment of current conditions, dropped to 19.4 from 25.2, the lowest level since 1983. The other barometer, which measures their outlook over the next six months and had been rising since October 2009, fell to 63.8 from 77.3.
Click to expand...

Consumer confidence falls sharply - Yahoo! Finance

double dip scares em all to death

party on, people
 
Lose Lieberman pick up Brown. :rofl

Somebody needs to do something. The GOP sitting on their hands obstructing the government sure ain't scoring them any points with me.

This boycott of their's has gone on long enough. Put up or shut up.

The sad part is, come election day, the only alternative is the other party. :doh
 
Re: UPDATE 1-New U.S. senator helps Democrats advance jobs bill

Councilman said:
Turn out the lights the party's over.

So Brown says: "I hope my vote today is a strong step toward restoring bipartisanship in Washington," what is he nuts?

Does he not understand the word NO? There have been no new net jobs created so far and this is not going to help either.
Click to expand...

I can't really say that I am surprised that Brown was one of the 5. This is why I didn't see what the big deal with Brown winning that seat. A republican in Massachusetts,New York or some other liberal is not the same as a republican in a lot of different parts of the country.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
We have to consider the timing (and scope) of this bill. How long are the tax incentives going to last? At this point, firms are (if they are in operation) assuming highly liquid positions which begs for a major uptick in capital investment. Given the relatively low user cost of capital, such a tax break can give an improving job market some much needed momentum.
Click to expand...

I agree,

We also have several indexes that are leading job indicators in the economy showing improvements. The Philly fed, the new york fed, the chicago fed, the federal reserve, they all showed an increase in business activity, an increase in capacity utilization, and an increase in production. This all means improved prospects for companies to hire, yet unemployment has remained high. I think this could help kick start hiring for many companies.
 
ny times today: "list of troubled banks at 16 year peak, says fdic"

List of Troubled Banks at 16-Year Peak, F.D.I.C. Says - NYTimes.com

up 27% in 4th quarter, 09

702 banks in danger of going under, compared to 252 a year ago

most dangerously endangered---the fdic, herself

obama's bailouts and tarps and takeovers AREN'T WORKING

empirically

the lady laments things are gonna get worse as the fed inevitably tightens credit, returns interest rates to more realistic levels

the emergency lending rate, banks lending to banks, was raised just last week, for example

keep in mind, as well---home foreclosures have NOT bottomed out, not close

11 straight months of 300,000+

home sales, home values---maybe

but home FORECLOSURES---no bottom in sight

it is what it is

sorry
 
Scott Brown you RINO sonofabitch! We all knew it!

How dare you!

:mrgreen::lol::rofl:rofl
 
kansaswhig said:
Scott Brown you RINO sonofabitch! We all knew it!

How dare you!

:mrgreen::lol::rofl:rofl
Click to expand...

He was more independent than a lot of people thought. Everyone just assumed he was super Republican because of his stance on health care.
 
kansaswhig said:
Scott Brown you RINO sonofabitch! We all knew it!

How dare you!

:mrgreen::lol::rofl:rofl
Click to expand...

They are throwing him under the bus like nobody's business.

Just go to his facebook page and see what the far-right scumbags are writing.

They'll eat their young.
 
meanwhile, the mega-rich get uber-rewards

reuters today: "wall street bonuses jumped 17% last year"

Wall Street bonuses jumped 17 percent last year | Reuters

now, there's some bailing out with more TANGIBLE results

washington has bailed out every TOO BIG while doing nothing for normal nate and nervous nell

in doing so the govt PRIVATIZED the gains of the richest people in the world

while SOCIALIZING their losses

20.3 billion dollars of bonuses may not tell too greatly on our national economy

(tho it's 35% more than harry's stimulus-which-he-can't-call-a-stimulus)

but the POLITICS of all these obscene bonuses signify HUGELY

we can all be certain, incidentally, that the figures cited include the aig bonuses treas secty geithner ordered kept secret from the sec

ugly, ugly politics AND economics

tsk tsk

nothing seems to be WORKING, president obama

you better FIX all this

and FAST

20B in bonuses really PISS OFF the UNEMPLOYED

hello
 
scott brown---LOL!

who cares?

health care's dead

cap and trade's dead

international climate accords are dead

wall street reg reform, the bank tax, the debt commission, closing gitmo, ending dadt, reaching out to iran...

no more, all gone

sorry

congrats tho on your 15 cent PAYROLL TAX HOLIDAY!

LOL!

and THANKS!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom