• 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!

White House backs House GOP jobs bill

Mycroft

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
101,755
Reaction score
45,391
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Signaling a brief spark of bipartisanship in Washington, the White House on Tuesday said it backs House Republicans’ effort to repeal a 3 percent withholding tax on government contractors, which is part of the GOP’s own job-creation push.

The White House said repealing the withholding will leave businesses with more cash to invest and create jobs at a time when the economy is still struggling.

“This would complement the administration’s other efforts to help small businesses. Repeal of the withholding requirement would also reduce implementation costs borne by federal and other governmental agencies,” the White House said in a statement of policy.

<snip>

Mr. Obama included it in his jobs plan last month, and House Republicans immediately signaled it was one of the few areas where they believed they could work with the president to get something passed.

read more at: White House backs House GOP jobs bill - Washington Times
Click to expand...


The question remains...will both Parties in Congress be able to move this proposal without killing it with unnecessary amendments?


We'll see.
 
I hope so. It is sad when bipartisan beliefs become so volatile that they don't even realize they are tearing us and the country apart!
 
Mycroft said:
The question remains...will both Parties in Congress be able to move this proposal without killing it with unnecessary amendments?


We'll see.
Click to expand...

The GOP takes too much blame for stalling when they are actually taking the time to properly plan these bills based on how they will really work as opposed to how it sounds in the context of wishful thinking. Liberals tend to hear the title of a bill and get caught up in how great it sounds and which way their imagination explains the bill in their head instead of actually looking past the title and understanding EVERYTHING that is involved as opposed to just the things that sound good to them.

Both sides have the same intentions (whether good or bad in motive), but you can't just say "Let's declare world peace" and expect the rest of the world to comply. You have to consider reality and what COULD happen.
 
Mycroft said:
The question remains...will both Parties in Congress be able to move this proposal without killing it with unnecessary amendments?


We'll see.
Click to expand...

It has a better chance of moving through now...because the GOP has finally got the message that americans see its THEM that are being the obstinate ones and lengthening all the grief....
Even Eric Canter is on a kinder gentler eric tour
 
As the article said, the Senate GOP lost a chance to pass this kind of bill because they attached spending cuts to it.

Wheeling and dealing is one thing, but when an idea that both sides like is derailed because of amendments that have nothing to do with the idea...that's a sad state of affairs.
 
Mycroft said:
As the article said, the Senate GOP lost a chance to pass this kind of bill because they attached spending cuts to it.

Wheeling and dealing is one thing, but when an idea that both sides like is derailed because of amendments that have nothing to do with the idea...that's a sad state of affairs.
Click to expand...

God forbid we cut the rate of spending that got us into the mess.

The idea is to create jobs and reducing the national debt by cutting spending would help. For every dollar cut in spending we reduce the needed revenue by three dollars because it costs us more than $.60 for the government to collect and spend a dollar.
 
Iron, attaching legislation on a totally different topic is what is being discussed, not the merits of spending cut.
 
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
Iron, attaching legislation on a totally different topic is what is being discussed, not the merits of spending cut.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that we are talking about "White House backs House GOP jobs bill" and cutting spending will help create jobs by reducing our national debt.
 
Smokified said:
The GOP takes too much blame for stalling when they are actually taking the time to properly plan these bills based on how they will really work as opposed to how it sounds in the context of wishful thinking. Liberals tend to hear the title of a bill and get caught up in how great it sounds and which way their imagination explains the bill in their head instead of actually looking past the title and understanding EVERYTHING that is involved as opposed to just the things that sound good to them.

Both sides have the same intentions (whether good or bad in motive), but you can't just say "Let's declare world peace" and expect the rest of the world to comply. You have to consider reality and what COULD happen.
Click to expand...

First off, let's NOT get it twisted. Of course House Republicans would vote against this tax; it takes money out of the Treasury. Funny thing is it's a tax REPUBLICANS put in place under GW Bush. Moreover, this IS NOT a jobs bill, but rather an elimination of a tax both sides agree didn't work as planned. Why? Because it was never implemented.

So, let's not pretend that the House GOP are doing something wonderful here. They've simply taken one step to "streamline" the tax code by getting rid of something that THEY implemented but in hindsight came to understand it did not work!

In other words, this was a TILIS moment for House Republicans.

TILIS = Tell It Like It iS
 
Last edited:
Iron River said:
God forbid we cut the rate of spending that got us into the mess.

The idea is to create jobs and reducing the national debt by cutting spending would help. For every dollar cut in spending we reduce the needed revenue by three dollars because it costs us more than $.60 for the government to collect and spend a dollar.
Click to expand...

I'm all for cutting spending. Congress should cut the hell out of government spending. But they should do that in spending bills...not every tom, dick and harry bill that comes along.

They need to focus, eh?
 
Objective Voice said:
First off, let's NOT get it twisted. Of course House Republicans would vote against this tax; it takes money out of the Treasury. Funny thing is it's a tax REPUBLICANS put in place under GW Bush. Moreover, this IS NOT a jobs bill, but rather an elimination of a tax both sides agree didn't work as planned. Why? Because it was never implemented.

So, let's not pretend that the House GOP are doing something wonderful here. They've simply taken one step to "streamline" the tax code by getting rid of something that THEY implemented but in hindsight came to understand it did not work!

In other words, this was a TILIS moment for House Republicans.

TILIS = Tell It Like It iS
Click to expand...

Well, I...for one...am happy when the Republicans realize they made a mistake and try to rectify their error. I would be happy if the Democrats did the same.
 
So you agree that we are not talking about attaching amendments but about creating jobs?
 
Mycroft said:
Well, I...for one...am happy when the Republicans realize they made a mistake and try to rectify their error.
Click to expand...

Fine, but they shouldn't be trying to pass off repealing such tax measures THEY APPROVED as some big jobs measure when it's really not. All that's been done here is a tax has been removed that both sides agreed didn't work and, as such, should make bidding on and funding government contracts easier when approved.

In short, by eliminating the tax it places more money in contractor's hands faster.
 
Objective Voice said:
Fine, but they shouldn't be trying to pass off repealing such tax measures THEY APPROVED as some big jobs measure when it's really not. All that's been done here is a tax has been removed that both sides agreed didn't work and, as such, should make bidding on and funding government contracts easier when approved.

In short, by eliminating the tax it places more money in contractor's hands faster.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that all you mentioned makes it more likely that the contractors will need more workers and be able to hire them.
 
Iron River said:
So you agree that we are not talking about attaching amendments but about creating jobs?
Click to expand...

Are you responding to me?

If so, then I've been talking about both.

1. "White House backs GOP jobs bill"

2. "Senate Republicans tried to pass a similar bill last week, but the administration opposed that version, arguing against the $30 billion in spending cuts the GOP attached to the measure."
 
Objective Voice said:
Fine, but they shouldn't be trying to pass off repealing such tax measures THEY APPROVED as some big jobs measure when it's really not. All that's been done here is a tax has been removed that both sides agreed didn't work and, as such, should make bidding on and funding government contracts easier when approved.

In short, by eliminating the tax it places more money in contractor's hands faster.
Click to expand...

Do you disagree with Obama on this?

"The White House said repealing the withholding will leave businesses with more cash to invest and create jobs at a time when the economy is still struggling."
 
Mycroft said:
Do you disagree with Obama on this?

"The White House said repealing the withholding will leave businesses with more cash to invest and create jobs at a time when the economy is still struggling."
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with it at all. I'm just saying that the House GOP shouldn't be trying to pass this measure off as a "jobs bill" when all they did was eliminate a tax neither side wanted to continue.

Will eliminating the tax put more money in the hands of contractors and their employees? Yes, absolutely.

Will releasing this revenue allow contractors to hire more workers or purchase more equipment? Yes, absolutely.

But this isn't a jobs bill; it's simply a tax rule change and nothing more.
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
I don't disagree with it at all. I'm just saying that the House GOP shouldn't be trying to pass this measure off as a "jobs bill" when all they did was eliminate a tax neither side wanted to continue.

Will eliminating the tax put more money in the hands of contractors and their employees? Yes, absolutely.

Will releasing this revenue allow contractors to hire more workers or purchase more equipment? Yes, absolutely.

But this isn't a jobs bill; it's simply a tax rule change and nothing more.
Click to expand...

Ummm...

You focus on the House GOP. Why is that? You DO realize that Obama is calling this a "jobs bill", as well, right? I haven't seen you say that Obama shouldn't be trying to pass this measure off as a jobs bill. Perhaps you can only bring yourself to criticize the GOP?

Anyway...be that as it may. Let's talk about your agreement that this bill will help increase hiring...but your refusal to call this a jobs bill. Sure, it's a tax rule change, but if the aim is to increase hiring then it IS a jobs bill. It doesn't have to have some fancy, jobs-relating name to be called a jobs bill, don't you think? Or DO you think it need a fancy name?

A rose is a rose, eh?
 
Iron River said:
God forbid we cut the rate of spending that got us into the mess.

The idea is to create jobs and reducing the national debt by cutting spending would help. For every dollar cut in spending we reduce the needed revenue by three dollars because it costs us more than $.60 for the government to collect and spend a dollar.
Click to expand...

How exactly did government spending cause bank balance sheets to overextend themselves at rates far beyond reasonable?
How exactly did government spending force non-CRA banks who issued the liion's share of the bad subprime to issue NINJA loans?
How exactly did government spending cause AIG to issue CDS far in excess of its assets?
How exactly did government spending financed by market rate debt offerings cause a decline in consumer demand?
How exactly did government spending force the Ratings Agencies to commit wholesale fraud upon the American people?

Now, I'm not saying the government isn't a fault here. Bush's Ownership Society, his unfunded Medicare D plan, the repeal of Glass-steagal under Clinton and the decade of cheap money under Greenspan coupled with the complex relationship of Dot coms to real estate all played a role here.

Want to explain how reducing spending that will cause a drop in aggregate demand that when coupled with anemic growth will likely cause a recession will lead to more jobs?

As for your 60 cents argument, that frankly makes no sense. If it cost the government 60 cents to collect and spend a dollar, then the deficit should be exceptionally higher considering the spending the government is doing coupled with tax revenues. Did you make that number up from the nether?
 
Last edited:
Iron River said:
Seems to me that all you mentioned makes it more likely that the contractors will need more workers and be able to hire them.
Click to expand...

Which has nothing to do with them hiring anyone. Or do you simply not understand how demand is the key role in hiring new people?

Furthermore, if we cut spending on contractors, that will do far more damage to net jobs. It's funny watching you praise cutting spending and lowering taxes as a way of increasing jobs without realizing what is actually going to happen.

Want to tell me what happens to a contractor who has his taxes cut by 3% but his demand by 50%? Does he hire more people? hahahaha
 
Smokified said:
Liberals tend to hear the title of a bill and get caught up in how great it sounds and which way their imagination explains the bill in their head instead of actually looking past the title and understanding EVERYTHING that is involved as opposed to just the things that sound good to them.

Both sides have the same intentions (whether good or bad in motive), but you can't just say "Let's declare world peace" and expect the rest of the world to comply. You have to consider reality and what COULD happen.
Click to expand...
Hence, one of several reasons why Nancy Pelosi lost the majority in Congress.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom