[excon]

So what your saying is that everyone that has more money in thier pockets is going to buy gold?

Hello again, dad:

I didn't say that, but the idea behind it is solid... You're talking about apples and oranges... Clearly, lower taxes will spur economic activity over the LONG RUN - IF the economy doesn't PLUNGE into DEPRESSION first. The "job creators" won't realize the benefit of the tax cuts for MONTHS at best, and if there STILL no demand, they're going to do SOMETHING with their money other than HIRE...

Ultimately, there IS demand. It's just not where the demand used to be. When NOBODY is buying stuff, real smart people are, so there's going to be fortunes made.. It's just NOT enough to stimulate the economy.

But, the government can create a HUGE demand, RIGHT NOW, by spending money on repairing the infrastructure. It's money that government is going to spend anyway. The longer they wait, the more expensive it'll be... Plus, it's ain't going to be good for you if it's YOUR bridge that collapses. These are REAL jobs. That work will CREATE jobs in the cement business, rebar, steel, tools, trucks, petroleum, shoes, uniforms, and on and on...

Yes, it'll ADD to the deficit... Ok, we'll pay it BACK when things are rolling again... I agree with D1ck Cheney... Deficits don't matter.

excon

[talaniman]

No wages=No demand=No growth.

So the real issue is putting money into real peoples hands in an honest way. Taxes alone won't do it. And no body spends on uncertainty that they won't have a permanent JOB/CAREER.

Steady INCOME=Certainty= Demand=GROWTH.

Keeps coming back to good paying jobs. Just like it always has through out our history. We can argue taxes after we get to working, and growing. Training, and education are some keys to pay attention to.

8 bucks an hour hardly meets that demand. For taxes, or growth, and does nothing for your confidence or needs.

You have to have more than a few bucks to buy gold, or anything else. Its not like there isn't enough work to do. Why aren't we doing it??

[cdad]

Hello again, dad:

I didn't say that, but the idea behind it is solid... You're talking about apples and oranges... Clearly, lower taxes will spur economic activity over the LONG RUN - IF the economy doesn't PLUNGE into DEPRESSION first. The "job creators" won't realize the benefit of the tax cuts for MONTHS at best, and if there STILL no demand, they're gonna do SOMETHING with their money other than HIRE...

Ultimately, there IS demand. It's just not where the demand used to be. When NOBODY is buying stuff, real smart people are, so there's going to be fortunes made.. It's just NOT enough to stimulate the economy.

But, the government can create a HUGE demand, RIGHT NOW, by spending money on repairing the infrastructure. It's money that government is going to spend anyway. The longer they wait, the more expensive it'll be... Plus, it's ain't gonna be good for you if it's YOUR bridge that collapses. These are REAL jobs. That work will CREATE jobs in the cement business, rebar, steel, tools, trucks, petroleum, shoes, uniforms, and on and on...

Yes, it'll ADD to the deficit... Ok, we'll pay it BACK when things are rolling again... I agree with D1ck Cheney... Deficits don't matter.

excon

Sure that's a nice thought. But what is different then the last time they had those shovel ready jobs? They squandered billions. And what do we really have to show for it? That's why now more then ever we need the fair tax. As you have said it may take months to see the result. Right now with what this administration has done they are looking at years down the road before any sort of recovery can happen.

So what is the better choice? Years or months? People know how to spend money. They do it when they have it. And when the certainty of the tax structure kicks in industry can reinvest in itself. That will create jobs and those jobs will bloom into others. WHo really pays coporate taxes anyway? It's the consumer. So if those are eliminated then that leaves room for spending on the business. That ball gets rolling. Also businesses will return to the U.S. as its profitable to do so again. It's a win win for everyone.

[tomder55]

Months and years down the road. We heard that 5 years ago when the infrastructure for pipelines and drilling was blocked . Instead we invested a cool half billion in a "greens job "company who's execs plead the 5th before Congress last week.

Next you know we'll sink money in an 'InterContinental' Rail Road.

[Wondergirl]

Sure thats a nice thought. But what is different then the last time they had those shovel ready jobs? They squandered billions.

No, not squandered. The states sat on the money they got from the federal government or used it to pay their bills. The shovel-ready jobs that were listed for my state were never done because the state did something else with the money.

It's like when I gave my poor friend money to buy food for her cats. She was so happy that she used the money to get a body part pierced instead.

Same thing with the banks. They are sitting on (i.e. investing) the money they were given to help with the mortgage situation.

The problem is that there was no accountability. The federal government trusted the states and the banks to do the right thing. They didn't.

[tomder55]

How can they be sitting on the bailout ? Last I heard, TARP was paid back with interest with $20 billion in profit to taxpayers. Where is the money ? Why no accounting for the TARP money returned ?
BTW... I agree many states misappropriated the funds and added them to the general revenue. Did it make the states more financially sound ? No. All it did was delay the Wisconsin type debates a year.

Also don't bother answering my 1st question... the answer to that is that the banks paid back TARP with very generously borrowed Treasury notes.

[talaniman]

Makes you wonder why defunct bridges and roads are NOT shovel ready when they have been in bad shape for years. I mean the one from Ohio to Kentucky has been talked about for 10 years.

[tomder55]

I presume that would be the business of Ohio and Kentucky... just like the Triboro Bridge and Tunnel Authority handles NY and NJ bridges.

[talaniman]

They both want their bridges fixed, they said so, so whose stopping that from happening??

[tomder55]

Not my problem... I am paying $12 to cross the George Washington Bridge . Let the users pay for the maintenance.

The truth is that the political ploy of the President of picking a bridge between Speaker Bonehead's and Sen McConnell's State is just that ;a ploy. It is the Brent Spence Bridge and it doesn't qualify . It has many good years left before any real repair is needed .

What they want to do is construct another bridge there to ease some congestion. That will happen in another 4 years according to the plans . So it is not one of those so called 'shovel ready' jobs the President is touting and would not get a dime of the next bucket list .

But it's good politics to have that photo op in the district of your political opponents ;so the truth be damned .

[talaniman]

No worse than calling a fat cat a job creator, or a poor man a lazy bum, or a teacher greedy.

[tomder55]

Zero for 3 if that is directed at me.

[talaniman]

No not directed at you, Tom, but at the ones above us both who lie and play on us. For their own greed and purpose.

[speechlesstx]

The Obama administration has finally found another way to create more jobs. Government bureaucrat jobs that is, and what's interesting is that even the EPA where these jobs would be added says the rules requiring 230,000 more people are '“absurd” in application and “impossible to administer”'.

Really? The private sector keeps bleeding jobs while the public sector added close to a million jobs from January 2008 to the middle of 2010, and we need another quarter million jobs to enforce "absurd" and impossible" rules that are probably going to cost more private sector jobs as businesses spend billions on struggling to comply.

You have got to be kidding me.

And speaking of " rules that are probably going to cost more private sector jobs as businesses spend billions on struggling to comply.

You have got to be kidding me.

And speaking of " rules, the administration is set to ban OTC asthma inhalers to save the planet.

Sigh...

[NeedKarma]

You guys still have inhalers that contain chlorofluorocarbons... for inhalation? Weird. I guess this is another case of big pharma winning over the people... again.

[talaniman]

What's wrong with power, and oil, and drug companies actually investing in clean, safe, effective technology? What's wrong with clean, air and water? For the taxes they pay, big business should guarantee safe and efficient medicines, and drugs, and power. Until then I suggest you police them, rather than trust them for doing the right thing.

Exxon hasn't cleaned up Alaska yet. Nor BP the Gulf. Until they do, I wouldn't give a rats patoot what they have to spend to protect us from their products. What they spend in lobbyist, and campaign contributions, can be used to pay for as many Environmental police as we need.

How's that for an offset. Sounds fair to me.

[smoothy]

Why should they when we have enough oil under our own ground to last several hundred years... but OH... thats why Global Warming hoax was dreamed up... as another way to stick it to big oil.

Never mind the fact the Federal excise tax is magnitudes larger than the profit they make per gallon. But I don't see any outrage over how much the government is making off every gallon sold.

[talaniman]

Why should there be outrage? They make big bucks and are subsidized by government. They make more money than anyone in the freakin' world, and you feel sorry for them?

Pretty obvious science AIN"T your strong suit. Or you have already sucked to many fumes. Come on guy, they spend big bucks investing in politicians and PACS, to get even more money, with no responsibility.

[tomder55]

Here is where we agree . No energy company should get subsidies... be they oil companies ,or solar.

[talaniman]

Oil companies have been around a long time, and can stand on their own, as will other alternative energy sources... eventually.

I know, I should have left it while we were in agreement. :( Sorry Tom.