Page 27 of 42 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 419

Thread: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

  1. #261
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    How is the subsidy paid to AT&T?
    Are you serious? This does not effect the workers (unless their company will not offer such coverage because it is not paid for by uncle sam), therefore your desire to spin this into a "they keep more of their money" is noted.

    In your world, corporate welfare does not exist because it lives in the form of tax deductions.
    Last edited by Kushinator; 03-06-11 at 11:29 AM.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #262
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Something like 24% in 2009, 50% in 2010, and 14% in 2011.
    So 24% of the 787 billion stimulus program saved us from a great depression? Do you really want to continue this charade? The Fiscal year of the U.S. govt. runs from October to Sept. and we came out of recession in June 2009 meaning less than 188 billion had been spent(787*24%). Don't see how 188 billion kept us out of a depression but economists do claim that the 700 billion TARP program did that. Did Obama propose and sign TARP?

  3. #263
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Are you serious? This does not effect the workers (unless their company will not offer such coverage because it is not paid for by uncle sam), therefore your desire to spin this into a "they keep more of their money" is noted.

    In your world, corporate welfare does not exist because it lives in the form of tax deductions.
    Right, corporate welfare to a liberal is any company keeping more of what they earn. That is typical liberal bs. So you admit that the corporate subsidy is in the form of a tax deduction?

    I keep hearing you tell us all about the multiplier associated with govt. spending but never the multiplier being applied to corporate profits, wonder why?

  4. #264
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    So 24% of the 787 billion stimulus program saved us from a great depression? Do you really want to continue this charade? The Fiscal year of the U.S. govt. runs from October to Sept. and we came out of recession in June 2009 meaning less than 188 billion had been spent(787*24%). Don't see how 188 billion kept us out of a depression but economists do claim that the 700 billion TARP program did that. Did Obama propose and sign TARP?
    No, the stimulus spending combined with expansionary monetary policy and TARP did. You take the stimulus away, and unemployment goes higher than 10%; 2010 was still a troubling period as Europe's debt issues pushed us incredibly close to a double dip.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #265
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    No, the stimulus spending combined with expansionary monetary policy and TARP did. You take the stimulus away, and unemployment goes higher than 10%; 2010 was still a troubling period as Europe's debt issues pushed us incredibly close to a double dip.
    That is your opinion as no one knows whether or not the states would have made the tough choices and come up with the money to save those jobs that Obama takes credit for. What we do know is that employment today is two million less than when he took office and 3.5 trillion has been added to the debt. We further know that if you drop 1 million from the unemployment roles you will get a reduction in the unemployment rate. The expansion of money supply started in late 2007 and continued throughout 2008 so still waiting for you to explain what economic policy Obama implemented that prevented another depression?

  6. #266
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Right, corporate welfare to a liberal is any company keeping more of what they earn. That is typical liberal bs. So you admit that the corporate subsidy is in the form of a tax deduction?
    Here is a quality article for you to argue with:

    About 3,500 employers provided prescription drug coverage to 6.3 million retirees nationwide who qualified for a federal subsidy in 2008, McDevitt said.

    The change in tax treatment shouldn’t affect retirees, said Linda Douglass, a White House spokeswoman for health care.

    “Firms will continue getting support for providing this benefit and generally are offering continuing prescription drug coverage as part of a compensation package,” Douglass said. “We expect that they will continue to do so.”

    The retiree drug subsidy is paid to companies that provide coverage for prescriptions to former workers who would otherwise be on a Medicare Part D plan. The average subsidy amounts to about $665 per plan member. Under prior law, the federal payment to companies was tax-exempt.

    The new law would require companies to “immediately account for the present value of this tax increase,” cutting earnings, Caterpillar’s Burritt and CFOs of nine other companies including Boeing Co., Verizon Communications Inc. and freight hauler Con-Way Inc. told U.S. Speaker of House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in their December letter.
    I keep hearing you tell us all about the multiplier associated with govt. spending but never the multiplier being applied to corporate profits, wonder why?
    Even if you were to cut corporate taxes dramatically during a financial crisis, you would still have to worry about igniting deflation, as tax cuts will undoubtedly have a net overall effect of lowering prices. The relationship between deflation and the economy is financial driven; the likelihood of default increases dramatically and is a tremendous strain on the financial sector.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #267
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    That is your opinion as no one knows whether or not the states would have made the tough choices and come up with the money to save those jobs that Obama takes credit for. What we do know is that employment today is two million less than when he took office and 3.5 trillion has been added to the debt. We further know that if you drop 1 million from the unemployment roles you will get a reduction in the unemployment rate. The expansion of money supply started in late 2007 and continued throughout 2008 so still waiting for you to explain what economic policy Obama implemented that prevented another depression?
    Credit easing programs (the brunt of the work) did not begin until late 2008, early 2009.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #268
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Here is a quality article for you to argue with:





    Even if you were to cut corporate taxes dramatically during a financial crisis, you would still have to worry about igniting deflation, as tax cuts will undoubtedly have a net overall effect of lowering prices. The relationship between deflation and the economy is financial driven; the likelihood of default increases dramatically and is a tremendous strain on the financial sector.
    It seems to me that you want the govt. to take the tax revenue from a corporation so they can turn around, apply govt. overhead to the revenue and distribute it as they see fit for retirement benefits of private sector employees? Does that about sum it up? I asked how that subsidy is paid and haven't yet gotten an answer. Can I assume that it is in the form of a reduction in taxes paid?

  9. #269
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Credit easing programs (the brunt of the work) did not begin until late 2008, early 2009.
    Yes, as a result of TARP which was signed in October 2008 by Bush.

  10. #270
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Unemployment dips to 8.9 pct., 192K jobs added

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    It seems to me that you want the govt. to take the tax revenue from a corporation so they can turn around, apply govt. overhead to the revenue and distribute it as they see fit for retirement benefits of private sector employees? Does that about sum it up? I asked how that subsidy is paid and haven't yet gotten an answer. Can I assume that it is in the form of a reduction in taxes paid?
    Prudential Financial just received a $15 million subsidy to upgrade their downtown Chicago office. It came in the form of reduction in taxes paid.

    They are both corporate welfare; a company relying on the public sector to pay for its health care liabilities. Do you support such actions?
    Last edited by Kushinator; 03-06-11 at 12:08 PM.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 27 of 42 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •