Obama promises

[Meck77]

Ok can someone help me recap them for the record?

He's only going to raise taxes slightly if you make 250k net per year right? 3%?

Capital gains tax is also only a slight increase?

I still don't know his stance on illegal immigrants. What's his plan there?

We'll be out of Iraq soon? By when did he say? What's his plan for Afghanistan? Didn't Pelosi and the other Dems promise to get us out of there two years ago?

Energy independence in 10 years?

What other promises would you like to see Obama held accountable for? Is there a complete list of them out there somewhere?

[Spider]

Meh just cut to the part where I get my welfare check so I dont have to truck any more

[gyldenlove]

Meh just cut to the part where I get my welfare check so I dont have to truck any more

Who are you going to throatpunch if you are not trucking anymore?

[Spider]

Who are you going to throatpunch if you are not trucking anymore?

depends on how good of a lawyer the government gives me

[ak1971]

What other promises would you like to see Obama held accountable for? Is there a complete list of them out there somewhere?

Crap I should have voted for him...ROFL!
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P36x8rTb3jI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P36x8rTb3jI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Meck77]

Gas in her car? What's she talking about? I thought Obama was going to make cars run on water? lol

[Spider]

Yes would hit that

[Meck77]

Yes would hit that

Me too. With a big dose of reality.

[Drek]

Ok can someone help me recap them for the record?

He's only going to raise taxes slightly if you make 250k net per year right? 3%?
Income and payroll taxes on top earners, $250K or higher, will return to approximately Clinton era rates, a 3% increase. Yes.

Capital gains tax is also only a slight increase?
Capital gains and dividend taxes will be moved from 15% to 20% for singles making over $200K profit a year, $250K for couples. Anyone making below that are exempt from capital gains taxes and home sales will be exempt for the first $500,000 (I'm assuming this will require the pretty standard 3 year or so occupancy to claim it as permanent residence).

Additionally on taxes:
He opposes many of the loopholes allowing companies to set up off-shore addresses, bank accounts, and branches to avoid paying U.S. taxes. Rupert Murdock's News Corp. for example is estimated to be paying around 6% in taxes thanks to these strategies, grossly below even Bush's tax brackets.

He is also seeking wide scale revocation of tax cuts for corporations that will then basically be reawarded to companies that increase jobs in America, increase energy efficiency, and/or help to deliver renewable or clean energy alternatives.

A few examples of this is his often stated claim of taking away tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies and instead giving auto manufacturers tax breaks and subsidies for building electric, hybrid, and ethanol automobiles.

Another case that I personally expect him to apply this to is the coal industry. The extreme right has tried to paint Obama as seeking to bankrupt the coal industry, when in reality he just wants cap and trade credits priced at a point where buying the appropriate types of air scrubbers and filtering systems is a more cost effective method. This is important because much of America's coal resources (throughout Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, etc.) is high sulfur coal which doesn't even meet our currently very lax environmental regulations without these kinds of scrubbers. Instead of installing them most coal plants just buy their coal from Wyoming and the surrounding region where it is low sulfur coal, but still pollutes with other contaminants. Currently we're not only not being clean with our coal burning, but we're also letting a large resource pool of it go to waste. His tax plans for this sector would change that.

I still don't know his stance on illegal immigrants. What's his plan there?
Not really a hot ticket thing for me so I haven't followed it real closely. I'm sure its better than John "you union workers won't pick cabbage for $50/hr." McCain's though.

We'll be out of Iraq soon? By when did he say? What's his plan for Afghanistan? Didn't Pelosi and the other Dems promise to get us out of there two years ago?
He wants a 16 month time table for withdrawal. The current administration actually believes this idea is entirely plausible as well, though in recent discussions with the Iraqi government they wanted to extend it to 20 months. The reason given for this (that the Iraqi government reported) was for "U.S. domestic reasons". Basically they didn't want to agree with what Obama has been saying all along.

As for Afghanistan, he wants to send an additional brigade or two there soon to begin stabilizing the region and he has been a strong proponent of taking the fight to Al Quaeda and the Taliban even if that means going into northern Pakistan. Of course he would try to bridge a diplomatic agreement for this with Pakistan by providing much needed humanitarian aid to their people.

I expect that his stances on these two will be slightly fluid as he gets fully briefed on the current situation on the ground in each country, but that is the framework.

Energy independence in 10 years?
That is his admittedly optimistic goal. He views it much like how JFK viewed landing on the moon. It might not be possible but we need to set our sights on the very edge of possibility in order to achieve greatness.

To do this he plans to put significant funding into a three fold approach. Renewable power (solar, wind, geothermal, tide, bio fuel, etc.), energy conservation (reducing gov't. energy consumption by 25% in 5 years, more hybrid and electric cars on the road, giving tax credits to companies who follow the government's lead and reduce energy usage by 20-30%, subsidizing consumer level energy saving innovations like HE washers, light bulbs, etc.), and infrastructure improvements allowing renewable and clean energies to be delivered from source A to consumer B with less loss and delay in service.

The last also plays directly into the first two as it would encourage people to move towards more renewables in their own homes since it would help them reduce energy costs and any surplus energy would be able to be sold back into the grid.

What other promises would you like to see Obama held accountable for? Is there a complete list of them out there somewhere?
You forgot his plan for greatly expanded health care that gives a tax credit to employers who provide health care and opens up a governmental program that will envelop medicaid and medicare to all people where insurance can be collectively bargained for. It is heavily based in market fundamentals and while it is not universal medicine it will be a big step forward in the coverage of American citizens.

I'm not expecting everything, but being out of Iraq by mid-2011, a significant investment in renewables, and at least the start of his health care and infrastructure plans should be materializing by 2012.

[Spider]

Me too. With a big dose of reality.

i could care less if she is crazy ........... just not that damn picky right now

[Meck77]

Thanks Drek. That's a good start for this thread.

Correct me if I'm wrong. The current capital gains rate is locked in place for a couple more years or can Obama change that right away?

Spider-Wolf's motor inn East Colfax is where you want to be then. AK knows it well.

[Beantown Bronco]

i could care less if she is crazy ........... just not that damn picky right now

Did you really need to add those last two words?

[ak1971]

Yes would hit that

the world doesnt need more Spider spawn.

[ak1971]

Capital gains and dividend taxes will be moved from 15% to 20% for singles making over $200K profit a year, $250K for couples. Anyone making below that are exempt from capital gains taxes and home sales will be exempt for the first $500,000 (I'm assuming this will require the pretty standard 3 year or so occupancy to claim it as permanent residence).



This is just RE gains. I would be stoked if I was exempt from capital gains on sales of equities.

[Arkie]

In my lifetime, W and Nixon had the lowest approval ratings. As a result, they were followed by the only two democrats to get over 50% of the vote. Also, the democrats control of Congress hasn't been this high since the Carter years. I just hope the government does a better job this time around. I see us going through the same two party cycle until our country falls like the Romans. We are too big and too divided. Both parties want big government to control us all, and that is what is dividing us and pissing off 50% of the population. More States rights are the only way a country this big can survive. California alone has the world's 6th largest economy, twice as big as Canada. We will fail miserably as a socialist republic, whether its individual or corporate driven.

[Garcia Bronco]

The ony promise I am holding him to are tax cuts for the middle class. If he raises taxes from an income tax perspective on the middle class by a penny he will not get my vote in the next elextion. This also includes not letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the middle class.

[Garcia Bronco]

In my lifetime, W and Nixon had the lowest approval ratings. As a result, they were followed by the only two democrats to get over 50% of the vote. Also, the democrats control of Congress hasn't been this high since the Carter years. I just hope the government does a better job this time around. I see us going through the same two party cycle until our country falls like the Romans. We are too big and too divided. Both parties want big government to control us all, and that is what is dividing us and pissing off 50% of the population. More States rights are the only way a country this big can survive. California alone has the world's 6th largest economy, twice as big as Canada. We will fail miserably as a socialist republic, whether its individual or corporate driven.


We have been divided since the early 1800's. That's not going to change and we'll still be here.

[Old Dude]

I think Drek covered most of it. But a few additional details on what I think is going to happen ...

1. I think we're looking at a 16-month timetable for winding down troops in Iraq. A portion of those, maybe 10-25%, will be reallocated to Afghanistan.

Is this feasible? Well, we've been basically baby-sitting (nation-building) Iraq for roughly 5 and a half years now. It's costing roughly 10 billion a month. The question is whether the Iraqis themselves have reached a point where they can shoulder the cost of their own stability & security. So long as we stay there, doing the dirty work for them, aggravating radicals and operating as a damage magnet, they don't have a lot of incentive to get off their butts and take charge. Sixteen months is plenty of notice to them that it's time to get their s*** together.

The savings aren't going to equate to a full 10 billion a month, because part of that will be reinvested in Afghan efforts and some of the secondary expenses (vet services) will continue for awhile. But there's a tremendous amount of potential "savings" that would help to fund some of Obama's domestic programs - - namely - -

a. Infrastructure - - roads, bridges, airports, shipping, schools, etc. One of the reasons that busoinesses like doing business in the US in the first place is because of our superior infrastructure. Everyone should benefit from this. We should see some job creation and something to occupy the construction industry other than building 300 thousand dollar homes for people who can't afford them. I think this is also an area where young folks will be able to earn some college tuition credits (by essentially supplying discounted labor). This could anything from involve helping out in schools, grunt work for community construction projects, etc. Think of it as kind of a domestic "Peace Corps."


b. Investment (and incentives) in alternate energy sources. This will probably take the form of tax breaks for businesses rather than direct government supervision of some sort of "Manhatten project." I don't think Obama is nearly as "anti-nuclear" as he was made out to be in the campaigns. I think we will see some job creation in these areas (but more by industry taking advantage of new projects rather than government jobs, per se.)

2. Health care. This is probably going to take a lower priority than infrastructure and energy. Obama does think that costs can be reduced by modernization of record keeping, centralization of services, greater focus omn prevention, etc. I think he's right, but I think the savings will be less than expected and as the population gets older, it gets more expensive to maintain. That's just a fact of "long" life. The thing that I think he will be able to do - short term - is to make basic health care more readily available to children.

3. Immigration reform. I think that this is going to take a big back seat. We have bigger economic fish to fry. Until this economy gets going again, we'll probably see a reduced influx of illegal immigration anyway.

---------------------

Social issues. Obama is a moderate. He probably will be pushed by a more liberal Congress. He will be appointing more liberal judges than Bush, but that's not really saying much. The Bush judiciary is slightly to the right of Ghengis Khan, so any change at all, will automatically be viewed as "more liberal." Change here will also be far more gradual than many people, such as myself, would like.

[Spider]

Did you really need to add those last two words?

;D ........ well I have been out here a month now , I got to go to Jonesboro AR , later today with a load going to Denver Colorado , then either I get ot go home , or I might have to go to De Moines IA .......

[Spider]

the world doesnt need more Spider spawn.

democrats every where ;D

[Paladin]

Thanks, Drek and Dude. Those summaries are great and they do present a great blueprint for actions for as we watch the changes unfold over the next 18 -24 months. As known, I am particularly interested in gettting pout of Iraq. That ought to frost Ol' Bushies cajoles that the exit plan comes from the Moderate Democrats and Iraqis. Further, I don't think anyone really gioves a rats' arse if teh Iraqis go on to a civil war there after the US leaves. That would sop up a good deal if Iranian time, money and attention for several years.....

To those who think about the increase of taxes on incomes above the 250,000 threshold, the additional 3% applies only to the dollars above the threshold, just like income taxes are done now. (You currently pay, say, 10% on the first x amount of dollars and the maybe 12% on the next, and 15% on the next, etc. Numbers are illustrative only.)

And, ya know what, that was the same percentage you would have paid before Bushie and his cronies decreased it. That decrease was never made "permanent" and I would doubt this Congress would have been inclined to re-enact that decrease in our lifetimes. On this, Obama simply rode the sentiments of the existing House of Reps out of which all tax bills originate. Barney Frank would have been hellish on any such proposition along with 200 or so other Reps..........

It is good to see some positive planms that do not involve giving a big break to the corporation, big oil, or the rich cohorts of politicians....

[Meck77]

It is good to see some positive planms that do not involve giving a big break to the corporation, big oil, or the rich cohorts of politicians....

Uh they just got it to the tune of 850 Billion.

[TDmvp]

Yes would hit that

hopefully with your truck ...

[Drek]

This is just RE gains. I would be stoked if I was exempt from capital gains on sales of equities.

I believe so, yes, but the capital gains and dividend rates will stay at 15% for everything else if you're under the $250K taxable income level.

And I'm assuming by "RE" you mean reinvestment? His concept on this is basically any money you're making from selling assets that you then want to turn back into the business to expand/grow shouldn't be taxed, period, as they will see taxes on that money anyways when you pay for the new expansion (employee salaries, real estate purchases, etc.)

[Spider]

hopefully with your truck ...

Oh hell no , be all up in that trim

[Drek]

Thanks Drek. That's a good start for this thread.

Correct me if I'm wrong. The current capital gains rate is locked in place for a couple more years or can Obama change that right away?

I believe Bush's tax cuts don't expire until 2010 and I believe Obama's plan is to just let them expire. If I recall there was some talk of repealing them early on but given the current weak investment market and financial liquidity in our banking system Obama didn't consider it a good idea.

FYI: McCain tried to decry this as showing how Obama's tax plan was dangerous for the economy. It doesn't say that at all. It does make sense though that you don't want to start locking up more money into the government from the investor class when we're already having poor liquidity in the financial sector. It isn't that these new taxes would bankrupt currently successful companies or some crazy myth like that, it just isn't a good idea to start freezing more resources up in the governmental budget when we're short on capital in the private markets as it is.

[ak1971]

I believe so, yes, but the capital gains and dividend rates will stay at 15% for everything else if you're under the $250K taxable income level.

And I'm assuming by "RE" you mean reinvestment? His concept on this is basically any money you're making from selling assets that you then want to turn back into the business to expand/grow shouldn't be taxed, period, as they will see taxes on that money anyways when you pay for the new expansion (employee salaries, real estate purchases, etc.)

RE=Real Estate. I havent done any research on it, but I hear short term capital gains could go up to as much as 40%+

[cutthemdown]

Gas in her car? What's she talking about? I thought Obama was going to make cars run on water? lol

unbelievable!!! LOL she said she won't have to worry about mortgage? lol.

[cutthemdown]

Thanks, Drek and Dude. Those summaries are great and they do present a great blueprint for actions for as we watch the changes unfold over the next 18 -24 months. As known, I am particularly interested in gettting pout of Iraq. That ought to frost Ol' Bushies cajoles that the exit plan comes from the Moderate Democrats and Iraqis. Further, I don't think anyone really gioves a rats' arse if teh Iraqis go on to a civil war there after the US leaves. That would sop up a good deal if Iranian time, money and attention for several years.....

To those who think about the increase of taxes on incomes above the 250,000 threshold, the additional 3% applies only to the dollars above the threshold, just like income taxes are done now. (You currently pay, say, 10% on the first x amount of dollars and the maybe 12% on the next, and 15% on the next, etc. Numbers are illustrative only.)

And, ya know what, that was the same percentage you would have paid before Bushie and his cronies decreased it. That decrease was never made "permanent" and I would doubt this Congress would have been inclined to re-enact that decrease in our lifetimes. On this, Obama simply rode the sentiments of the existing House of Reps out of which all tax bills originate. Barney Frank would have been hellish on any such proposition along with 200 or so other Reps..........

It is good to see some positive planms that do not involve giving a big break to the corporation, big oil, or the rich cohorts of politicians....

So then you don't think Obama signs the security pack with Iraq and leaves American troops in Iraq? Iraq so calm now compared to what it was I'm not sure that would be the smart move.

[TailgateNut]

Ok can someone help me recap them for the record?

He's only going to raise taxes slightly if you make 250k net per year right? 3%?

Capital gains tax is also only a slight increase?

I still don't know his stance on illegal immigrants. What's his plan there?

We'll be out of Iraq soon? By when did he say? What's his plan for Afghanistan? Didn't Pelosi and the other Dems promise to get us out of there two years ago?

Energy independence in 10 years?




What other promises would you like to see Obama held accountable for? Is there a complete list of them out there somewhere?



Why don't we first RECAP your hero's promises, and see how he did over the last 8 years.

[Drek]

RE=Real Estate. I havent done any research on it, but I hear short term capital gains could go up to as much as 40%+

Short term capital gains are taxed as income. So depending on what income bracket you fall in you might see an increase, but only if you make over $250K.

[Garcia Bronco]

I believe Bush's tax cuts don't expire until 2010 and I believe Obama's plan is to just let them expire. .

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire is also an income tax increase on all Americans.

[Garcia Bronco]

Why don't we first RECAP your hero's promises, and see how he did over the last 8 years.

He delivered on income tax cuts for the middle class. Twice

[cutthemdown]

Rich people will now sell off anything they were planning or thinking about liquidating. That way they will get in under the lower capital gains tax. Obama won't get more revenue then Bush with his tax increase.

[barryr]

Obama and Biden kept changing the number and the lower it kept going, yet no one in the media decided that was something to wonder about. So who really knows, but if you really believe only those making 250k or more will see a raise and taxes, I have some swamp land for sale.

[ak1971]

Obama and Biden kept changing the number and the lower it kept going, yet no one in the media decided that was something to wonder about. So who really knows, but if you really believe only those making 250k or more will see a raise and taxes, I have some swamp land for sale.

Bill Richardson was on KOA over the weekend and mentioned a $120K number

[cutthemdown]

Bill Richardson was on KOA over the weekend and mentioned a $120K number

That will probably be the number for singles or something.

For sure Obama will raise peoples taxes. If he taxes other things like energy etc even poor people will get an increase.

[Paladin]

So then you don't think Obama signs the security pack with Iraq and leaves American troops in Iraq? Iraq so calm now compared to what it was I'm not sure that would be the smart move.

Since the current UN agreement runs out this December, I would think he woould enfourage something that allows the US up to 24 months to get our stuff out of there. With that, I would see the violence level to remain relatively low. Then when the US gets out, I expect the Shia and the Sunni factions go at it with Iran backing the Shia and Saudi backing the Sunni. That has been a war for a couple thousand years, and that will be their probelm to deal with. That would be sort of like the Irish Troubles in a different language.

[Paladin]

That will probably be the number for singles or something.

For sure Obama will raise peoples taxes. If he taxes other things like energy etc even poor people will get an increase.

Are you talking facts or are you just dragging stuff out of your arse? You are dissing the stuff Drek and Old Dude posted.

[cutthemdown]

Since the current UN agreement runs out this December, I would think he woould enfourage something that allows the US up to 24 months to get our stuff out of there. With that, I would see the violence level to remain relatively low. Then when the US gets out, I expect the Shia and the Sunni factions go at it with Iran backing the Shia and Saudi backing the Sunni. That has been a war for a couple thousand years, and that will be their probelm to deal with. That would be sort of like the Irish Troubles in a different language.

If Obama pulls out and that happened then he would take a lot of heat for it IMO. If Iraq spirals out of control he would have to answer for his decision to not leave any security help.

Plus the the last thing we want is Iran and the Saudis fighting a cold war with Iraq in the middle. A civil war breaking out in Iraq, and America sitting it out, would scare the crap out the oil industry and send prices to 150 barrel again. That happens and Obama can forget about re-election.

I bet he does sign the pact and leaves American troops in Iraq.

[smalltowngrll]

Higher taxes for big businesses means less profit. First thing to be cut will be jobs! So, you can expect higher unemployment.

So, yeah, we'll tax those that make more even more, but then you'll have more people without jobs. Guess it's how you 'spread the wealth'.

Anyway, Obama's original plan on Iraq was to begin troop withdrawels in 1 month and everyone out in 16 months. He's since changed his tune and now realizes that the original plan of others was probably the best way to handle it. (guess he went back on that promise!)

We'll see how much the deficit is reduced. He's promised to reduce the deficit by increase tax on the higher 1%. But, experts that have run the numbers say that it's numerically impossible to reduce the deficit and still pay for all the programs that Obama wants to create.

National healthcare is another one of his promises. Not sure on the fine tuned details.

[ak1971]

thought this was a good article:

If President Elect Obama were the incoming CEO of a corporation, he would now be preparing for the first act of his tenure: A massive write-off of the mountains of rotted junk buried on the company's balance sheet and an announcement that recovery will take a long, long time.
This flush would clear the way for several years of better than expected results. It would also take advantage of the new leader's one chance to blame the sorry state of the organization on his sorry predecessor.
President Obama began this process last night, in his victory speech, when he noted that restoring the country's health might take more than a term. In the next few weeks, he should go well beyond this:

The deficit will be more than $1 trillion a year for several years
The country needs a massive new fiscal stimulus
The housing market will continue to decline through at least 2010
Interest rates and taxes will eventually have to rise (after the economy stabilizes)
Weak corporations have to be allowed to fail
Millions of homeowners will lose their house
Unemployment will probably rise to 10%
The government simply cannot "bail the country out" -- not because it lacks the will, but because it lacks the powerIn short, Obama needs to acknowedge reality, erring on the side of overstating the problems and challenges, and he needs to prepare the country for several tough years. Because if he doesn't, within six months of his taking office, the country will have forgotten all about the prior administration and will instead be blaming everything on him

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/106822/President-Obama's-First-Step-Reset-Expectations?tickers=%5Edji,%5Egspc,%5Eixic

[Spider]

Oh brother ......... bunch of over reacting morons .............. how in the hell did we survive Reagan .........

[Spider]

Obama gonna raise our taxes , we is going to be poor .......
can barely afford ammo to go huntin this winter ......... will have to use old news papers for shoes ........... Insulate out houses with straw ...... have to go back to usin wood for heatin and cooking our kill ........ no mo electricity .....we are dooomed ........

[smalltowngrll]

thought this was a good article:

If President Elect Obama were the incoming CEO of a corporation, he would now be preparing for the first act of his tenure: A massive write-off of the mountains of rotted junk buried on the company's balance sheet and an announcement that recovery will take a long, long time.
This flush would clear the way for several years of better than expected results. It would also take advantage of the new leader's one chance to blame the sorry state of the organization on his sorry predecessor.
President Obama began this process last night, in his victory speech, when he noted that restoring the country's health might take more than a term. In the next few weeks, he should go well beyond this:

The deficit will be more than $1 trillion a year for several years
The country needs a massive new fiscal stimulus
The housing market will continue to decline through at least 2010
Interest rates and taxes will eventually have to rise (after the economy stabilizes)
Weak corporations have to be allowed to fail
Millions of homeowners will lose their house
Unemployment will probably rise to 10%
The government simply cannot "bail the country out" -- not because it lacks the will, but because it lacks the powerIn short, Obama needs to acknowedge reality, erring on the side of overstating the problems and challenges, and he needs to prepare the country for several tough years. Because if he doesn't, within six months of his taking office, the country will have forgotten all about the prior administration and will instead be blaming everything on him

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/106822/President-Obama's-First-Step-Reset-Expectations?tickers=%5Edji,%5Egspc,%5Eixic

Ironically, that goes against everything he was preaching in has campaign to be elected! That is reality, not the pie in the sky promises he gave.

[Meck77]

Obama gonna raise our taxes , we is going to be poor .......
can barely afford ammo to go huntin this winter ......... will have to use old news papers for shoes ........... Insulate out houses with straw ...... have to go back to usin wood for heatin and cooking our kill ........ no mo electricity .....we are dooomed ........

Did you check your mail today spider? Obama is fast! Got my check today and I'm quitting tomorrow! I don't have to worry about gas or my mortgage because if I take care of Obama he'll take care of me!:rofl:

[Spider]

Did you check your mail today spider? Obama is fast! Got my check today and I'm quitting tomorrow! I don't have to worry about gas or my mortgage because if I take care of Obama he'll take care of me!:rofl:

No but i would be nice , havent been home in 31 days ... on my way ho,e tomorrow , but there is a chance I may have to go from Denver to Des moines for 2 more weeks ..........sure would be nice to see my family

[Bronco Bob]

Higher taxes for big businesses means less profit. First thing to be cut will be jobs! So, you can expect higher unemployment.

So, yeah, we'll tax those that make more even more, but then you'll have more people without jobs. Guess it's how you 'spread the wealth'.



I just don't understand where you people get the idea lowering taxes creates jobs.
Have you not been paying any attention the last 8 years. Bush had massive
tax cuts and there has also been massive job losses. So what are you basing
this on, smoke and mirrors? Voodoo economics?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Did you check your mail today spider? Obama is fast! Got my check today and I'm quitting tomorrow! I don't have to worry about gas or my mortgage because if I take care of Obama he'll take care of me!:rofl:
This is the kind of discussion that I find annoying.

Her POINT...while obviously lacking in sophistication and more simplistically stated than it should have been...is surely not far from how the GOP backers ALSO see economic benefit to themselves from their own party. So whether she's able to articulate herself using terms like supply side economics, trickle down effect or stimulus packages...what she's saying is not out of line with what you probably also believe.

Over and over in here I've seen the right push the idea that INCENTIVE for profit drives economic growth and job creation is propogated through rewarding big corporations and their shareholders with minimal responsibility to return anything to the treasury beyond the fact they will hire more people, though you don't phrase it like that of course. What she's saying in terms of incentive is probably no different if you understand that where she's coming from is essentially the same position you are, which you apparently don't.

So what if you see the "reward" system as having to do with lowered capital gains taxes or business de-regulation? She probably sees it as having something to do with the emphasis being placed on health care, education and infrastructure in her community...and whether she states it as such or not is beside the point. Maybe if you nailed it down further you'd find that she envisions affordable child care or a repeal of gasoline taxes as kicking enough back to her budget that she can move up a notch or two or afford a better living standard...I don't know...what I DO recognize is that you seem to be attempting to make some kind of quasi political point about her ignorance...(perhaps to paint her as "typical" in some respect?) What's your point here? Are you trying to justify the policies that have seen us abandon her community in the first place? That's the way it comes accross.

Perhaps if she'd been educated in the burbs she'd understand the degree of sophistication in market economics that you do and might not have exposed herself to ridicule. Maybe the mere fact that she has is testimony to fact that we ought to be changing the realities of inner city schools or building support structures in these communities that INCENTIFY participation in the economy rather than withdrawal. THAT is what a lot of people who voted for Obama saw in the first place...which is why there were so many new voters registered. Not surprisingly...a lot of people on the other side will be utterly clueless to that fact, which is why the GOP is beiong increasingly seen as irrelevant to people's every day lives.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Higher taxes for big businesses means less profit. First thing to be cut will be jobs! So, you can expect higher unemployment.

:bs:

This is the same old trickle-down nonsense that has already been thoroughly repudiated by the last eight years.

Just the opposite of what you are saying turned out to be true.

[shakenbake]

Wow, no one has mentioned hope or change in this entire thread. Then again I am not sure how we measure that.....

[Drek]

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire is also an income tax increase on all Americans.

It would be, if the plan that replaces it didn't maintain and further lower the tax rates for 95% of America.

Rich people will now sell off anything they were planning or thinking about liquidating. That way they will get in under the lower capital gains tax. Obama won't get more revenue then Bush with his tax increase.
It isn't about creating revenue. It is designed to prevent hoarding.

Where will the extremely wealthy put money to avoid these slightly higher taxes? Either they set up illegal off shore tax shelters and accounts, something that Obama has talked at length about cracking down on, or they reinvest it in growth and expansion of their companies, other business ventures, or market investment.

The biggest problem of the last eight years is we've seen the modern day equivalent of robber barons throughout the market, especially on needed resources like oil. The wealthy ride speculation bubbles and bail at the peak, making the burst of the bubble even more painful, while they pull out large sums of capital and either hoard it or move it to the next speculation bubble.

This is why we see the mortgage crisis and why oil is now plummeting. The system was easily gamed thanks to Phil Gramm's deregulation and Bush's tax cuts made the profit margins on doing so far too good for anyone to resist.

Obama's plan will remove much of the incentive to exploit market manipulation bubbles and instead promote longer term savvy investment that keeps investments and profits associated with those investments tax sheltered for the long term. That will put more liquidity back into the banking system and market as a whole, which will further strengthen the American dollar.

As for revenue, John F. Kennedy increased revenue from the extremely rich and he did so while reducing the tax rate from the low 70% area down to the mid 60% area just because the government started closing loopholes and enforcing tax regulations on the wealthy. Obama will do that while also featuring a modest bump on that bracket, a small portion of which will be offset for the rich by the decrease in their taxes on the first $250K they make.

The decline of the dollar isn't entirely a product of our deficit or the fact that we are much less of a production company than we used to be. Those plan huge roles for sure, but the widening gap between the extremely wealthy and everyone else, along with how that extreme wealth has been removed completely from the economic engine of this nation, has played a considerable role as well.

Higher taxes for big businesses means less profit. First thing to be cut will be jobs! So, you can expect higher unemployment.
This is the great unproven mantra of Reaganomics. Economic conditions these past 8 years compared to the pre-Reagan era as well as the Clinton administration are the perfect real world litmus test for this theory, and it failed completely.

Trickle down is a myth. Companies don't think "well if I'm going to get taxed more I'm going to compete less, so not only do I lose more to taxes, I make less period!" Instead they look for internal cost cutting methods while expanding and growing in order to carry more write offs and increase revenues in order to maintain the company's net bottom line.

[Garcia Bronco]

It would be, if the plan that replaces it didn't maintain and further lower the tax rates for 95% of America.



We'll see. Obama isn't the only mouth at the podium on this issue. The democratically controlled Congress will decide this.

[Drek]

We'll see. Obama isn't the only mouth at the podium on this issue. The democratically controlled Congress will decide this.

You mean the democratic party Obama took pretty much complete and total control over in the last year and a half?

We've seen how weak Pelosi and Reid are. They have their opinions and beliefs but they bend like willows in the wind under the slightest pressure. If they're back as speaker and senate majority leader Obama will be able to do largely whatever he wants.

The only political faction with any real teeth other than Obama's executive staff right now are the blue dog democrats. The far left dems have shown their weakness under the last 8 year of Bush and most of their constituency is not as radical as they personally are, so they need to be tempered to even stay in office. The GOP is now significantly weakened and far from united, they will not have a cohesive front on anything for probably two years at least and even then it only takes a couple defectors to give a filibuster proof majority.

The blue dog fiscal conservative democrats were in the double digits when the dems were only a 51 to 49 majority. Almost all of the new seats they're picking up are blue dog types as well. We'll see probably 15 or so fiscally conservative dems who can drive the senate to their whims by siding with the fiscal conservatives left in the GOP or their democratic party, at their discretion.

Obama would've been in this category had he not moved to the presidency so quickly, in my opinion, and I think that is what we will see as the driving philosophy over the next four years.

[smalltowngrll]

I just don't understand where you people get the idea lowering taxes creates jobs.
Have you not been paying any attention the last 8 years. Bush had massive
tax cuts and there has also been massive job losses. So what are you basing
this on, smoke and mirrors? Voodoo economics?


I guess you forgot about the several years in the middle of that 8 where the unemployment rate was 4%?

Remember, most of the job losses today come from the crash of the real estate market, not the big corporation. That's the issue here.

[BroncoInferno]

I guess you forgot about the several years in the middle of that 8 where the unemployment rate was 4%?

Remember, most of the job losses today come from the crash of the real estate market, not the big corporation. That's the issue here.

Job growth was greater under both Reagan and Clinton than under Bush, even though Bush cut taxes to a greater extent. Sorry, trickle down economics has been tried and proven wrong. Simple fact.

[alkemical]

http://cryptogon.com/?p=4896

OBAMA CONSIDERING JON CORZINE, ANOTHER FORMER GOLDMAN SACHS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, FOR TREASURY SECRETARY
November 6th, 2008

Change can happen. Change we need.

Yes, friends, change is having different former CEOs of Goldman Sachs serving as Treasury Secretary.

Via: Star Ledger:

Gov. Jon Corzine, a multimillionaire and former Wall Street chief executive, is being actively vetted by the Obama transition team as a possible candidate for Treasury secretary in the new administration, two New Jersey Democrats familiar with the process said early this morning.

As part of the vetting process, the transition team is reviewing Corzine’s financial and personal documents, the sources said. The sources asked not to be identified because the vetting process is confidential.

Neither Corzine nor his aides would respond to a request for comment.

Corzine, who used to run financial services giant Goldman Sachs, had long dismissed as speculation talk that he might be interested in running the sprawling U.S. Treasury Department. But in recent days he has changed his message, telling a television interviewer “No one’s ever going to say never.”

Corzine said last night that if President-elect Barack Obama asked him to serve in his administration, he would consider the offer — but that he’d rather fight for a second term in New Jersey.

“I’d like to stay here and use New Jersey as a basis” and example for the rest of the country, Corzine said on New Jersey Network from the victory party of U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.).

The governor has long, deep ties to Obama after having been an early advocate for the president-elect’s upstart campaign for U.S. Senate in 2004. Though Corzine backed Obama’s opponent, Hillary Clinton, in the Democratic primaries, the governor quickly moved to renew his relationship with Obama after the president-elect had secured his party’s nomination. Since then, Corzine has played a key role in Obama’s universe as an economic adviser and booster for the incoming president.

Corzine’s name surfaced as a member of the short list Monday in a report on the TheDeal.com. He would follow a long line of Goldman Sachs leaders into the secretary’s post, including the current secretary, Henry Paulson.

[Drek]

Corzine wouldn't be a bad choice.

He was at Goldman Sachs before it was even publicly traded and before all the wild speculation took them down into the gutter. Since then he's served as both a senator and a governor. Pretty respectable track record overall.

I'm still hoping for Krugman as Sec. of the Treasury and Jim Cramer as head of the SEC.

:D

[Old Dude]

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/07/news/economy/jobs_february/index.htm

(from March 2008)

Job losses were widespread, reaching beyond the battered construction sector, which lost 39,000, and manufacturing, where job losses hit 52,000.

Retailers cut 34,000 jobs.

Temporary staffing firms cut nearly 28,000 from their payrolls, another warning sign of employers pulling back.

Hotels cut about 4,000 jobs, a sign that discretionary consumer spending could be on the wane.

Overall the private sector cut 101,000 jobs, with only a gain in government employment limiting losses.

"Job growth appears to have weakened across nearly every industry with the exception of health care and government," said Keith Hall, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which prepares the jobs report, testified Friday before a congressional committee.

Hall would not give a forecast for hiring, but others said the latest report suggests more job losses likely lay ahead.

"Businesses have become too pessimistic about the outlook for the economy, and the capacity of the Bush Administration and Federal Reserve to manage it, to be adding new employees or replacing those that leave," said University of Maryland professor Peter Morici.

Underlying weakness
Despite the loss, the unemployment rate improved to 4.8% from the 4.9% reading in January. Economists had forecast the unemployment rate would rise to 5%. A survey of households is used to estimate the unemployment rate, while a survey of employers that is considered to be more accurate sets the readings on the changes in payrolls.

The unemployment rate fell because of an increase of 450,000 people whom the government no longer counts as being part of the labor force for a variety of factors, such as that they are not currently looking for work. That drop in the size of the labor force allowed for he modest decline in unemployment, even as the household survey showed 255,000 fewer Americans with jobs than in January.

Hall conceded in his testimony Friday that the labor market was weaker than suggested by the decline in the unemployment rate. He pointing to an increase of 637,000 workers over the past 12 months who have part-time jobs but would prefer to be working full time.

He said the bureau's broadest measure of the unemployment rate, one which counts as unemployed both those part-time workers who want full-time jobs as well as those not searching for a job at the moment but who are interested in finding work, now stands at 8.9%, up from 8.1% a year ago.

"We've clearly had a broad weakening in the labor market," Hall testified. "This weakening in the labor market is not a sudden thing, it has been happening for over a year."

[Old Dude]

Yesterday:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/05/news/economy/challenger_adp/?postversion=2008110508

Job cut announcements by U.S. employers soared to 112,884 in October, up 19% from September's 95,094 cuts, according to outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. That was the highest number of pink slips handed out since January 2004. Layoffs last month were up 79% from October 2007, when 63,114 job cuts were announced.

Separately, payroll manager ADP said Wednesday that the private sector lost a seasonally adjusted 157,000 jobs last month - more than six times September's decrease and the largest drop since December 2001.

The dour reports were ominous signs for the jobs market ahead of the Department of Labor's monthly unemployment report on Friday. That report is expected to show that 200,000 jobs were lost in October and that the unemployment rate grew to 6.3% from 6.1% a month earlier.

"The economy has taken a marked turn for the worse, so it's hard to envision a scenario where we don't see steep job losses in the next few months," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "In the best-case scenario, jobs will stabilize by the middle of 2009."

October's numbers bring the total number of planned job cuts to 875,974 in 2008, 14% higher than all of 2007 and the largest 10-month total since 2003.

The embattled financial and automaking industries were hit the hardest, as they have been all year. The struggling industries have seen a combined 239,760 layoffs so far this year, representing 27% of all layoffs in 2008.

With a Wall Street credit crisis leading the economy into a likely recession, 17,949 financial sector jobs were lost in October. The automotive industry cut 15,692 jobs last month. Low consumer confidence and high gas prices during the spring and summer have led to historically low sales of automobiles around the globe, especially for trucks and SUVs.

[Old Dude]

As for the deficit:

http://www.cbpp.org/9-12-08bud.htm

The federal budget is projected to run a $546 billion deficit in 2009, compared with the $710 billion surplus that budget experts projected for 2009 back when President Bush took office nearly eight years ago. This $1.3 trillion deterioration in the nation’s fiscal finances for 2009 can be seen by comparing estimates that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released this week with those that CBO released in January 2001.

The story is much the same for the entire ten-year period covered by CBO’s 2001 projection. In January 2001, CBO projected a cumulative $5.6 trillion surplus for 2002-2011. Now, CBO’s new report suggests the nation will amass a cumulative deficit of $3.8 trillion over that same period, marking a $9.4 trillion deterioration.

For both 2009 and the ten-year period, this massive deterioration is partly due to weaker-than-expected performance of the economy, along with other “technical” factors that are beyond policymakers’ control. But these economic and technical factors account for less than one-fourth of the fiscal deterioration for each period, and they are not responsible for the return of deficits. Even given the disappointing performance of the economy since 2001 relative to CBO’s earlier projections, there would have been large surpluses in every year — totaling $3.4 trillion over the 2002-2011 period — if policymakers had enacted no tax cuts or program increases since 2001.

The dominant factor in the unprecedented fiscal deterioration thus was not the performance of the economy. Nor was it increases in domestic programs. The key factors have been large tax cuts and increases in security-related programs. For fiscal 2009, some $1 trillion of the $1.3 trillion deterioration in the nation’s fiscal finances stems from policy actions, and tax cuts account for 42 percent of this $1 trillion deterioration. Increases in military and other security programs account for another 40 percent of the deterioration.

The story is much the same for the ten-year period as a whole. For the 2002-2011 period, tax cuts and increases in security programs account for more than four-fifths of the fiscal deterioration caused by policy actions. Increases in domestic programs played a much more modest role.

[Bronco Bob]

Obama and Biden kept changing the number and the lower it kept going, yet no one in the media decided that was something to wonder about. So who really knows, but if you really believe only those making 250k or more will see a raise and taxes, I have some swamp land for sale.

Where did Obama change the numbers? And no, I don't care what Joe Biden
said or what Richardson said or what Papa Smurf said, where did Obama
change the numbers?