
In a meeting with several reporters this afternoon, House Minority Leader John Boehner outlined the top three measures he'd pursue if he becomes Speaker of the House next Congress to create new jobs. But, those who thought he'd outline specific programs and how they would create jobs were disappointed with a familiar litany of wish-list items: repeal health care reform, eschew climate legislation, and renew the Bush tax cuts.
In other words, repeal a program that largely hasn't yet taken effect; prevent new legislation that is also not in effect; and keep a current tax structure in place. Step four: profit. Or jobs.
"The first thing I would do is repeal Obamacare," Boehner said at the Christian Science Monitor luncheon. "It is a giant impediment for employment. Not only will it ruin the best health care system in the world, it will bankrupt our country.
"Secondly, no cap and trade," Boehner added. "You raise the cost of energy, you raise the cost of doing business."
"Thirdly, not raise people's taxes," he concluded. "You want to get the economy going, give some people certainty about what the tax rates are going to be." Democrats hope to let the Bush tax cuts on wealthy Americans expire before the end of the year -- Boehner wants the tax cuts to continue across the board.
He also argued that any unspent stimulus funds ought to be reclaimed.
So lets take stock. Republicans will create jobs by:
1). Rolling back comprehensive health care legislation. (Notably, Boehner also supports repealing financial reform).
2). Simply promising not to do something. An anti-initiative, if you will.
3). Keeping current tax rates in place.
Doing all of these things, which technically represent the status quo pre-Obama, would apparently inspire companies to start hiring.
Boehner was unusually confident of Republicans chances of retaking the House -- what he described as "the greatest deliberative body in the history of the world." (FYI.)
He boasted that Republicans might well run candidates in all 435 Congressional districts) and made no secret of his desire to be Speaker of the House -- a feat he says he can accomplish with the help of Tea Partiers, whom he described, perhaps accidentally, in a less than flattering light.
"Seventy-five percent of these people who show up at these events are the most average, every day Americans you've ever met. None of whom have ever been involved in political process, and I'd guess half of them have never voted," Boehner said. "These people have been driven off their couch, they've been driven off their EZ-chair, driven away from their TV, and into the streets of America to demonstrate against their own government."
tinsk
July 21, 2010 4:17 PM
News flash for Boner.
#1 Repeal Obamacare - Um.. no you can't and won't. You'll never get it through the Senate and you won't have veto override majorities.
#2 Okay.. Boneman, you might win this one. On the other hand, Cap and Trade is pretty much dead.
#3 Wrong again. Even if you gain the House, the tax cuts expire before you would take the gavel. The middle class cut will remain in place. The cut for the rich goes. You'll have to try to reinstate the tax cut for the rich and you'll have to show you can pay for it. And you can't. Additionally, a tax cut for the rich won't ever come to the floor in the Senate and if it did and passed, you won't have veto override majorities.
So Bonerboy, you got nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 21, 2010 4:31 PM in reply to tinsk
"You'll have to try to reinstate the tax cut for the rich and you'll have to show you can pay for it. And you can't."
Haven't you heard? Tax cuts for the wealthy pay for themselves automagically!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
July 21, 2010 6:31 PM in reply to tinsk
Shorter BonerSpeak: "Hell No we won't do anything" to fix the economy. And that same plan worked so well for President McCain also!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 22, 2010 1:15 PM in reply to tinsk
There were tax cuts across the board for taxpayers in the Bush tax cuts.
the lowest tax bracket is 10% instead of 15%
The highest tax bracket is 35% instead of nearly 40%
We still don't know what the outcome of the talks will be but both the Kennedy tax rate cut (from 90+% to 70% for the highest incomes) and the Reagan tax rate cut (from 70% to 35% for the highest incomes) both results in larger influxes of revenue to the treasury from individual taxes.
something at work about people working in their own self interest.
Cap and Trade SHOULD be dead because I don't want my energy bill to "skyrocket" as Obama promised it would.
I have listened to Dems whining about not having enough votes in either house when Obama is unlikely to veto anything they pass. Even if he does, in a showdown between the president and the house of reps... the house usually wins... unless the media conspire to change the criteria.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
destor23
July 21, 2010 4:18 PM
Step four: Job monkeys from Mauritius. We import a whole bunch of them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xb1
July 21, 2010 4:25 PM in reply to destor23
Monkeys!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 21, 2010 4:45 PM in reply to xb1
They better have their papers in order though!
Oh wait.. They'll most likely be working for GOP donors, they better be undocumented so they can avoid those evil taxes, required wage levels, and worker's comp. Because those are all socialist ideals that destroy our freedoms.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jimbobuddy
July 21, 2010 10:23 PM in reply to PartTimeRoadie
My Monkey can see Mauritius from my front porch!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
July 22, 2010 7:30 AM in reply to xb1
Mmmmmm . . . monkeys!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shrubbit
July 21, 2010 4:22 PM
Corporate welfare, not public welfare.
Why are you even in government if you have such disdain for the American people?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Damiana
July 21, 2010 5:22 PM in reply to Shrubbit
To paraphrase what a wise man once said, "any time the question is 'why do they' the answer is 'power'".
Anyone who actually wants to make the world a better place for other people (and not specifically the ones with money to give you) is doomed to stay a very small cog in the machine. Only those whose primary interest is building power have any chance of wearing the big boy pants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 21, 2010 5:47 PM in reply to Shrubbit
I've wondered the same.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Former Federal Employee
July 22, 2010 7:00 AM in reply to Shrubbit
Corporations are people too. :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 22, 2010 11:21 AM in reply to Shrubbit
hear, hear.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 21, 2010 4:22 PM
To paraphrase:
'We'll go back to how things were under Bush, and everyone will be happy!'
The shame is that, the GOP has their base so brainwashed that anything 'liberal' or 'progressive' is evil, and now, according to Glenn Beck, an enemy of God, they will continue to vote against their own interest.
I weep for my country.
Is it my imagination, or wasn't there a time when the opposition party actually considered facts, and used them in their arguements? I mean, spin and hyperbole always has been, and always will be, a part of politics. It's been that way since the Greeks. But didn't we used to agree on what the basic facts were?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SoSad69
July 21, 2010 4:25 PM
can this guy be any more of an idiot? Same stuff that got us in this mess and he thinks it will help things?
Oh, and tax rates are the lowest they've ever been and he seems to think we're over taxed? What a friggin whack job. But, being that he's a republican I should just expect it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
windowpane
July 21, 2010 4:44 PM
There is a mistaken notion that "everyone" wants a return to full employment. The unemployed are being crushed while employers are whistling Dixie. Just imagine, less benefits to pay when you have a part-time workforce. More money for political donations to you-know-who. No wonder the GOoPers are unsympathetic to the unemployed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 21, 2010 5:00 PM in reply to windowpane
You got what you voted for...the hopelessness of socialism.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
July 21, 2010 6:22 PM in reply to Silence
Oh yeah, corporate bailouts, military escalations, and the entrenchment of private health care while the corporations sit on two trillion dollars and do nothing with it to help the economy. Yeah, that's socialism for ya, idiot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 21, 2010 10:57 PM in reply to Silence
Wrong on two counts.
1-Obama is a Moderate Liberal, not a Socialist, and 2-its Conservatives who think doing things like extending unemplyment benefits leads to people refusing to work. Now that's what I call the hopelessness of Conservativism.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
July 22, 2010 5:52 PM in reply to Silence
Can you even define that word? You sure do use it alot, but never in it's actual context.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 21, 2010 4:58 PM
Repeal, repeal, repeal...until there is nothing left of the corrupt admin's debacle to repeal.
The jobs will follow.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
July 21, 2010 5:20 PM in reply to Silence
Just like they did during Shrub's terms, right? I guess I missed the millions upon millions of jobs that were created, as did the BLS, which shows an overall performance well under the 100k/month needed to even keep pace with population growth.
Or perhaps we could look at the Raygun years - tons of jobs there, right? Or not...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
toddincabo
July 21, 2010 6:43 PM in reply to Matt Jones
If you don't respond to these trolls, they will eventually go away.
One word descriptions such as loser, toothless, prick, etc. helps them go away faster, if you must.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 21, 2010 6:49 PM in reply to Matt Jones
I have a better idea. Why not look at the current economic and political landscape? I know. It's crazy, but it's the most logical and intelligent place to start.
Employers are frightened to death by this crazy, inept administration and congress.
There, that pretty much sums up the jobs problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Forrest
July 21, 2010 7:53 PM in reply to Silence
"Employers are frightened to death"
Why do you think that is?
Could it be the profiteering fearmongers spewing hyperbole and outright misinformation via every available form of media?
I may not agree with everything Democrats do, but the right wing in this country is so worked up now they have paralyzed the entire country.
As a country we better learn to overcome these hurdles of the early information age, or we won't be around to worry about it.
Step 1: Get your 'news' from more than one media empire.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 21, 2010 8:15 PM in reply to Forrest
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We all know what comes next.
It's racist to discuss the unemployment problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Skybolt
July 21, 2010 9:04 PM in reply to Silence
I have a suggestion for you. Stop being an authoritarian sadist 100% of the time. Set reachable goals. For example, see if by the end of the month you can be an authoritarian sadist just 80% of the time. Then work from there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 21, 2010 9:42 PM in reply to Skybolt
Oh, I'm so disappointed. It's "racist", authoritarian sadist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Forrest
July 21, 2010 11:26 PM in reply to Silence
I think it's moderately entertaining how hard you're trying to make this about race, despite race having NOTHING to do with it. Why are you trying so hard? What's the benefit to making everything about race?
Republicans say unemployment is high because people are lazy. If that's true, race has nothing to do with it. No race has a monopoly on laziness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Skybolt
July 22, 2010 8:49 AM in reply to Silence
I have no idea if you are a racist, while I am certain that you are an authoritarian sadist. However, if it turned out that you were also a racist, it wouldn't be surprising. These sorts of mental deficiencies often vary together.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
July 22, 2010 9:30 AM in reply to Silence
No, they're really not. There are actual tangible reasons for current economic decisions that amount to long-term consequences of decisions made by the last several administrations. Your attempt to account for everything with political spin squaring everything on the current administration is both ridiculously myopic (given what we know about why and when jobs started to disappear) and a prime example of partisan hackery at its worst.
What's the point of debating people like you? It's all just a sports game to you. Your "team" is always right, everything wrong must be the fault of the other "team." No actual knowledge of economics needed. I guess there are worse hobbies than spouting empty slogans on the internet, but I certainly don't see the appeal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Don
July 22, 2010 10:59 AM in reply to Silence
OK lets look at the current political and economic environment...
Actually, employers are afraid to expand because the credit markets are so tight, limiting their ability to borrow. They couldn't care less about "socialism" which is a straw man argument for the weak minded followers of Bonehead and his ilk.
Explain to me how eleminating the estate tax is beneficial to the unemployed and helpless.
In the past few months, only 4 people dying left a total of $6.1 Billion untaxed dollars to their immediate relatives. Those poor 4 families...how could they ever have survived on just $3 BILLION?
The economy tanked in March of 2008, while Bush and Cheney denied, against all evidence (what else is new about that?), that we were in recession and aobu tto head into a free fall,,,which they ignored until September of 2009. So, you expect a problem that developed over 7 years to be solved in 17 months, especially considering that the Republican party, which fully supported everything Bush did, now refuses to even negotiate in good faith to solves these problems. What horseshit.
As for politics, its obvious the Republicans are stalling all they can, to make the Administration look bad, howver people are smarter than they think and will remember the stonewalling and lack of ideas by the Republicans come November. They are so ineffective that their more radical (or ignorant, or both) form up the Tea Party to force some kind of action on their part. Unfortunately, Teabaggers are no more interested in fixing this nation, as they are at tearing down the President.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 21, 2010 11:06 PM in reply to Silence
None of the things you want to repeal were in effect when Obama came into office, and the economy went into a tailspin under Bush anyway.
Now you want to go back to the way things were under Bush, and you think the policies that failed then will now suddenly work.
You Conservatives have nothing new to offer.
NOTHING.
And you think Obama is "hopeless".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
July 22, 2010 8:40 AM in reply to Silence
This line of reasoning is charitably known as faith-based economics, and we've had our fill of it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
July 22, 2010 5:57 PM in reply to Silence
Because Bush's administration created SO many jobs, right? Oh, wait...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ahumbleopinion
July 21, 2010 4:59 PM
Guess we have finally reached the point where Republicans have told their lies so many times, the voters buy it without thinking. They don't even have to bother to hide their agenda anymore. Fox News could tell voters the moon was made of green cheese and they would believe it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
July 21, 2010 5:30 PM in reply to ahumbleopinion
Yes, Republicans slip up and tell the truth frequently now; like Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Michael Steele, or the would-be governor Tom Emmer of Minnesota who told waiters they were overpaid because they got minimum wage, and he was going to reduce their pay to be more "fair" to restaurant owners. A decade ago, that would have been a career-ender. But after a couple decades of Republicans saying that nobody who works for a living deserves a decent wage, benefits, or even Social Security or Medicare, telling waiters they are worthless doesn't sound so bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George TheShrubber
July 21, 2010 5:03 PM
Yo, Leftwing wibwul media... you forgot that the Speaker-in-waiting would....
1) raise the benefit age on social security to 70
2) means test benefits on social security
3) privatize social security
4) remove the tanning bed tax
Thats an aggressive agenda i'd say. Nothing like grabbing and holding on to the third rail. Hope our seniors are aware of OrangeMan's plans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
July 21, 2010 5:36 PM in reply to George TheShrubber
Unfortunately the Republican plan to end Social Security is working. The plan was to tell everybody over 55 not to worry, their benefits would be protected -- and it worked! Over 55 and probably collecting Social Security and Medicare pretty much describes the Teabaggers; they know the orange man's plan and they approve; well at least for everybody except themselves.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hank
July 21, 2010 6:29 PM in reply to condew
No because every year a (*&$W$)load of people turn 65. SS is still the third rail.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LESD
July 21, 2010 6:02 PM
Agent Orange represents nothing but greed and ignorance. Lord help us if becomes Speaker.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Given Up
July 21, 2010 7:38 PM in reply to LESD
Actually i would almost (almost) welcome a republican controlled house, it would mean that they have to come up with ideas and sell them. As we can (hopefully) see this is not likely to happen. A republican controlled house for 2 years sets up the dems for 2012 (I hope).
Not that I think that this will happen, media hype notwithstanding.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aq
July 22, 2010 10:40 AM in reply to Given Up
You know what? I like this idea.
But the Dem's would have to actually start tagging them as the 'no idea, no use' party.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 21, 2010 6:21 PM
This is like the South Park episode with the elves that stole underwear as a business venture. When asked about their business plan, they said:
Step One: Steal underware.
Step Two: They all just shrug their shoulders.
Step Three: PROFIT!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 21, 2010 6:46 PM in reply to Bob
Well, phase 3 is Profit!
I know I know, but what's phase 2?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dougom
July 21, 2010 8:07 PM
The default question that the press needs to ask, when confronted by a politician who makes bald statements about "the American public" or "what Americans want" is, "What are you basing that on?" Let's go to the tape:
"[Health Care Reform] is a giant impediment for employment." What are you basing that on? Do you have statistics or facts of any kind to cite in support of that statement? Or is it just an article of faith?
"Not only will it ruin the best health care system in the world . . ." Most measures show that the U.S. healthcare system isn't the "best in the world;" what are you basing that on? As far as it getting "ruined," what are you basing that on? Do you have any facts to cite to support that statement?
"[Health Care Reform] will bankrupt our country." What are you basing that on? What are your facts?
The press allows these ignorant yaboes to just make these statements as if they were facts, and they most sincerely are not. Then politicians like Boehner follow up this pile of suppositions, preconceived notions, and unproved assumptions by drawing conclusions based thereon. It goes without saying that if you base conclusions on dubious propositions, your conclusions are even more dubious.
More reporters need to challenge this nonsense. Not the conclusions--once you start arguing about the conclusions, you have yielded the ground on the suppositions. No, press folks: challenge the assummptions!
What are you basing all that on, Mr. Boehner? Cite facts. And no, "Business has told us they won't be able to sustain it" is not a fact; it's an assertion. Try again!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TerryDarc
July 21, 2010 8:32 PM
"Not only will it ruin the best health care system in the world, it will bankrupt our country. "
By no measure is US healthcare #1 except in spending money. No measure. None.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
July 21, 2010 9:17 PM in reply to TerryDarc
This may be true, Terry. So our solution of throwing another trillion dollars onto the pile accomplished what exactly then?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
margoharris
July 22, 2010 1:49 AM in reply to truth > spin
It is sad that you have no idea what is in the HCR bill. There are many things in it to lower costs and by following the Mayo Clinic systems where costs are lower and outcomes better.
HCR is the biggest deficit reducer ever, the cost of Health care is what is bankrupting this country's future.
If only you people wanted to know the thruth and seek it our your eyes would be open.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truth > spin
July 22, 2010 12:15 PM in reply to margoharris
Margo, I promise you that I'll match my understanding of the HCR bill against anyone else's on this site.
There are very few things in the bill that was enacted that will lower costs. The stuff that might have helped mostly got dumped or watered down as a result of pressure from both sides - the so-called Cadillac tax being chief among them from Dems and also the end stage review (so called death panels) from the GOP. Yes I think the GOP was wrong to make an issue of that - most spending occurs to move the needle of longevity and quality of life very very little.
Also, that the bill focused on insurance companies missed the forest for the trees. The issue is not the middle man. It's how much and how we reimburse doctors, hospitals, clinics and drug companies. That's where the money ends up, not at the financial intermediary.
The cost of health care, which I agree is bankrupting this country's future, will not go down as a result of this new law. It is going up. We are pouring more money onto a broken system. If only YOU people would wanted to know the truth and seek it our YOUR eyes would be open, thank you very much.
Seriously, bring something more than pablum next time you want to call me out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cindyperry2009
July 21, 2010 9:02 PM
So boner nose is all about doing nothing. Spread the news far and wide my friends a repuke who will do nothing. What a shock I myself am amazed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Captain Crunch
July 21, 2010 9:04 PM
Why does he want the job so badly if he plans to do nothing? Is being in charge of doing nothing (for $175K a year) so prestigious?
I guess being conservative means allowing no changes (except for your rich buddies on Wall Street and the Oil Companies)!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cindyperry2009
July 21, 2010 9:38 PM in reply to Captain Crunch
That's it precisely.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 22, 2010 6:09 AM in reply to Captain Crunch
I'm in the wrong fucking business... Maybe I should run for Congress as a write-in just to make his life miserable.
I mean, Pingree has done good by our district, but she doesn't make any noise when the Repubs say and do brainless BS. Me, I'd make them justify every lame brain, fact-free statement they made.
Beohner and Fox would LOVE me! Not....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 21, 2010 11:22 PM
I am of the opinion that in his darkest moments, Boehner is imagining that if Republicans can take both houses of Congress, they can Impeach both Obama and Biden (together I guess) and -presto-change-o, he becomes President.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cujo359
July 22, 2010 12:17 AM
Yes, we all know the Republicans will be useless when it comes to reviving the economy, since they have no idea what screwed it up in the first place.
Who cares?
What are the Democrats going to do, and when will they start doing it? The last quarter-assed stimulus didn't even last through the summer, and there are still at least ten million people out of work.
If the Democrats aren't going to do anything useful, why am I supposed to worry about Speaker Boehner?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PartTimeRoadie
July 22, 2010 8:21 AM in reply to Cujo359
The Dem's biggest problem is they lack a spine. They watered down every bill since Obama was sworn in, in an attempt to get GOP support. They never figured out that, they aren't going to get any GOP support, because the GOP doesn't want the Dems to get any credit for any success, and being the party in power, will take all the blame for the short falls.
The GOP is in a can't-lose situation, and the Dems keep allowing it. If they stood up to them, twisted a couple of arms in their own party to keep them in line on cloture votes (you know, like repubs do), then they could actually accomplish something useful.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Terry Ott
July 22, 2010 1:24 AM
I've been a business owner, have worked in 3 corporations, and have provided consulting expertise to dozens of other businesses. Only since retirement have I had much time to observe the political and government scene.
It's always seemed curious to me how many citizens tend to blame or give credit to government vis a vis the economy.
Over the years it has been my experience that the private sector adds payroll positions and/or lets contracts for goods and services when they see demand rising and can envision how to turn that demand into profitable revenue. It really IS that simple. Before we get all "wee wee'd up" about various public initiatives to (so called) "create jobs", it would be helpful to see evidence that anything government does is central to the private sector creating jobs. As long as that notion is afloat, Obama will get a bum rap. There's not much he can do, and there is not much the GOP could do either.
What's behind what Boehner's position, I think, is that business decision makers --- executives, investors, lenders --- get edgy and draw back when they cannot see a pattern of demand growth in the markets they serve. And to the extent they perceive the government will be required to tax and borrow more, they see that as harmful to the medium and longer term economic climate. Meager demand growth, and substantial government "taking"; that's what too many of them see in their crystal balls.. Boehner chooses to use a few "red meat" phrases to "shorthand" this fundamental perception, and to give a Cliff Notes version of what is something of a philosophical question, and in so doing he dumbs down the overriding concern that has us on a collective finance/econ "pause" status. The root cause of that concern, in my opinion, is that we really do not seem to have a clear and articulated idea about government's impact on the economy, and no visible strategy to guide government intervention so it does more good than harm to the economy.
We have people bloviating about "creating jobs" (or, conversely, killing jobs) who have very little experience in doing anything even faintly resembling that. Sadly, we have millions of Joe Sixpacks out there who actually DO have some experience in the world of work and profit generation. But they are not involved at all in formulating government policy. All they can do is observe and comment about how it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to them.
From the get-go I have believed that the best approach to jolting the economy out of its stupor would have been to TEMPORARILY suspend payroll taxes and let people keep more of the money they've earned-- and let their subsequent spending and investing stimulate demand. But nobody asked me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
July 22, 2010 6:47 AM in reply to Terry Ott
good post. i don't know if i agree or disagree, but the fact that you gave me some real stuff to think about is appreciated.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 22, 2010 6:53 PM in reply to Terry Ott
Umm... ever heard of the Internet, or the Web browser, or, I don't know, the Interstate Highway System?
Because those were all government-sector initiatives.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bluer
July 22, 2010 1:57 AM
Dems should make the Bush tax cuts their stimulus.
Don't just let the cuts expire. Keep the cuts, but put requirements around them. The Republicans have this blind faith that if you just throw money at corporations and rich people, they will use the money to invest and build the economy. They did - they built the economy of China, but wrecked US manufacturing.
The Bush tax cuts should be changed so that a corporation needs to build a factory here, expand production lines here, design a new product here. In the US, not China. Add US jobs. Make energy efficient products, clean energy. Stimulate the economy in the right directions.
Initially, keep the Bush tax cuts dollar for dollar, but demand results. Pull back on some of the tax breaks / stimulus when the economy recovers and balance the budget.
Taking this course, the Reps can't claim that they favor lower taxes, while the Dems want to raise them. It will instead be about whether we will demand results for the tax breaks given or just throw more money at the rich and big corporations and trust they will make decisions that benefit the US economy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
July 22, 2010 7:20 AM in reply to Bluer
How is stealing less from people, giving them something?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
July 22, 2010 9:27 AM in reply to Silence
Right – the grocer "steals" from you by requiring you to pay for your family's purchases at the checkout counter.
Taxation with representation is what we've all agreed to accept, and how we've agreed to pay for what our democratically chosen representatives decide to spend; if you aren't willing to pay your share, go away.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 22, 2010 12:02 PM in reply to Silence
how much are u being paid for each post? Your just Right wing talking points to the max.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
July 22, 2010 8:45 AM in reply to Bluer
Problem:
How do you verify/enforce the strings you'd attach to upper-income individuals' tax cuts?
Corporate tax credits for demonstrated green domestic job creation, sure; Individual rate cuts for the rich, not so much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bluer
July 22, 2010 9:11 AM in reply to FlownOver
Yeh, I was thinking mainly of corporate taxes. Maybe give individuals a tax cut for investments in companies that invest in the US (not sure how to confirm).
The inheritance tax should be brought back with no strings, on estates of 6 million and more.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BrightLightsBigCity
July 22, 2010 9:57 AM
When John Boehner talk about creating jobs, he is talking about low wage, no benefits jobs? We have a lot of those in Texas. One thing Texas' chambers of commerce advertise is the low wage climate in their city when recruiting business.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hologram5
July 22, 2010 10:34 AM
I don't know what planet this asshat is from but I say we deport him back there...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lin
July 22, 2010 10:59 AM
http://www.vipshopper.us
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Don
July 22, 2010 11:06 AM
Of course someone with an orange spray on tan whould be against a tax on tanning booths! Obviously, Bonehead is trying to appeal to Melanoma-Americans, while attepmting to appear as one of them....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 22, 2010 11:28 AM
Why do you fail to understand that low taxes for the rich solves every problem? It is the political version of panacea.
By not taxing the rich and ignoring the needs and desires of the suffering middle class and poor the Republicans will make this nation into the banana republic they envision it to be.
The notion that the non-rich should have a say in the way this culture operates is deeply offensive to the Republican Party. If you are not rich enough to buy a legislator please butt out of the political process.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 22, 2010 12:53 PM
Create the worst recession in our history, stand by and watch the country disintegrate without offering a hand, and then say re-elect us and we will do the same thing again. They are banking on the uninformed, uneducated, the racists and the rich to put them back in charge. I don't believe that can happen. Also I have lived with alcoholics my whole life and I can see that Bohner acts, and sounds like an alky. Just saying!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bdf
July 22, 2010 12:57 PM
The definition of insanity? Let's do the same thing that got such a disastrous result last time and for no particular reason, expect a different outcome. Or, maybe a disastrous outcome IS the goal of the Rethugs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Anita
July 23, 2010 11:19 AM
Look obummeer and his socialist, communist party passed all of this legislature that the majority of Americans oppose. They wanted these programs. Let them pay for it out of their own personal funds. If they can not pay for them, then let all of this communist crap die. Don't fund it. We also need conservatives to repeal these big government take over plans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cksessum
July 23, 2010 4:00 PM
It's simple really. Employers are adjusting to market conditions in a recessive economy. Growth is no longer the key. It's efficiency. Bigger is not better in a shrinking economy. Profitability is king. In a tight job market, you pay people less, stop hiring, and use the resources you have by any means necessary. Payroll is the biggest expense for most businesses. Work them harder, pay them less, and if they don't like it, hire one of the ten other folks who would be happy to have ANY job. It's an employer's market folks, nothing complicated about it. All of the credit market and tax crap is secondary. It's relatively good for workers when we are on the up cycle of this economic experiment that started under Reagan, but when times are bad... well times are bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?