Originally Posted By mrkthompsn 23 seconds into this video, your President obliterated his "Audacity of Hope". So corny that this summit even exists. They will never entertain slashing taxes on every class as a legitimate solution - nor will they admit their intent to raise taxes was a cause of unemployment in the first place: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2009/12/03/obama.jobs.hearing.cnn.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/video/data/...cnn.html</a> In this speech, he has done a good thing by replacing "hope" with "do". The problem is that he is asking the question: "do what?". He does not know what to do. The results of his summit will provide nothing of substance to answer the question "do what?". It's great that he admits the solution is in the private sector, but he doesn't see that they're strapped with preparing the the liabilities he's about to land on them. His inability to answer his own question dissolves the authenticity of his leadership. Will he ever be able to write "The Audacity of Do"? He doesn't know how. The funny thing is: the question is so easy to answer.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << nor will they admit their intent to raise taxes was a cause of unemployment in the first place >> This is the most genius piece of spin I've seen yet! Now, the right can blame taxes that aren't raised on causing economic problems! Go back to economics school, please. The anti-tax crowd had their moment in the sun and drove our nation's economy to the brink of insolvency. Now, it's time for the grown-ups to make the decisions.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I think that the cause of current unemployment was the bursting of the biggest credit bubble in history. Consumers are no longer able to borrow willy nilly to buy houses, cars and other toys. <<The problem is that he is asking the question: "do what?". He does not know what to do.>> There is little they can do except wait for the excesses of the bubble to unwind themselves, which will take years. Beyond that all they can do is provide a social safety net so that riots can be prevented.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Beyond that all they can do is provide a social safety net so that riots can be prevented.<< Woulda been nice if they had thought of that before running up the deficit to obscene levels. 9_9
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "It's great that he admits the solution is in the private sector, but he doesn't see that they're strapped with preparing the the liabilities he's about to land on them. His inability to answer his own question dissolves the authenticity of his leadership." This is the same kind of mealy-mouthed blather than Sen. Cronyn was droning on about yesterday. Deal with it, he's got more charisma, intelligence and leadership in his little finger than anyone the GOP can produce right now. Obama is damned if he do, damned if he don't. And raising taxes? HAS to be done.
Originally Posted By andyll <<No we have to cut spending.>> Take a look at the budget and then tell us where?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <The anti-tax crowd had their moment in the sun and drove our nation's economy to the brink of insolvency. Now, it's time for the grown-ups to make the decisions.> Thank you. Boy howdy.
Originally Posted By dshyates "They will never entertain slashing taxes on every class as a legitimate solution" Because it's not a solution to ANY of our problems. "nor will they admit their intent to raise taxes was a cause of unemployment in the first place." Haha! Don't let reality get in the way of a great Anti-Obama conspiracy theory.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "nor will they admit their intent to raise taxes was a cause of unemployment in the first place." This sentence doesn't even make any sense.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I would compromise with "start with the military". The company I work for is doing well given this economy, but we're still thinning the manpower. All bonuses and raises have been suspended indefinitely. I spoke with our company CEO on a business trip last month and ask when he thinks salaries and jobs will pick back up. His answer, "When we have saved enough cash to cover the retroactive taxes that are coming."
Originally Posted By SuperDry ^^^ It sounds like your boss needs to turn off his radio. Exactly what retroactive taxes is he talking about? Considering that we're almost at the end of 2009 and nobody has even started talking about specific tax increase proposals let alone being close to passing legislation, what is the context? At the very worst, I could imagine a tax proposal passed sometime in mid-2010 going back to the first of the year, but we're not there yet. Certainly and profits booked in 2009 or prior years will be taxed at the currently-effective rates. If your boss is withholding your bonus and raise based on the notion of saving for future retroactive taxes, your problem lies with your boss, not Obama.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "His answer, "When we have saved enough cash to cover the retroactive taxes that are coming." Then he's an idiot. Or a thief. There's no such thing.
Originally Posted By Mr X Interesting to note that Mrk manages to surround himself with like-minded folk though. That must be harder and harder to pull off these days.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn part of the "retroactive tax increase" will be the cost shuffles of absorbing the costs of upcoming health care reform - which are to this point still unknown, but very likely to increase liabilities on companies' balance sheets. Part of the summit discussions: "[the President] got a blunt answer from Fred P. Lampropoulos, founder and chief of Merit Medical Systems Inc., a medical device manufacturer in the Salt Lake City area. Mr. Lampropoulos said some in his discussion group agreed that businesses were uncertain about investment because “there’s such an aggressive legislative agenda that businesspeople don’t really know what they ought to do.” [referring to possible liabilities to be landed upon businesses] That uncertainty, he added, “is really what’s holding back the jobs.”
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn <<"nor will they admit their intent to raise taxes was a cause of unemployment in the first place." -- This sentence doesn't even make any sense.>> If companies know that their federal liabilities are to surely increase, then cash needs to be reserved for that. Since the increased amount is yet unknown - but promised in campaigns - those cash reserves must be grown, protected, and not made available for additional staffing. Once the tax increases and addition liabilities are finally established, at least the "unknowns" of company budgets will become manageable. But keep in mind, if those liabilities are indeed increased, those companies will indeed be less able to fund new employee positions. Cut the liabilities and they will be more able to fund new positions. What doesn't make sense about that? Sure tax increases next year (as Democrats ~always~ want), the might not be retroactive to this year, but they will be retroactive to January 1, 2010. The cash reserves being made this year are to fund the fed increases next year, so the financial impact will not be such a "bump" when it happens.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 That man is not exactly an unbiased observer. Ask any business - or any individual - if they want their taxes raised. You may find a few people looking at the larger picture of the country's deficits who will say they'd be okay with it, but most people (and businesses) will simply say no. They look at how they're doing at this moment in time, and then think about paying a larger share of their income in taxes... and they say "no, I don't want to do that." And typically, businesses especially will say "it'll kill us." The President, however, has to look at the bigger picture. That's his responsibility. There is such a thing as taxing too high. But - and the anti-tax fetishists never admit this - there is also such a thing as taxing too low and running into masses of red ink. The closest we've come in the last 30 years to the "sweet spot" of taxes low enough that businesses run well and high enough to not swim in red ink was in the 90's. The very wealthiest and some businesses paid more than they do today. But guess what? The wealthy did fine in the 90's. Just fine, thank you. And the economy did better. And that's all Obama has ever proposed - restoring tax rates back to where they were in the 90's. This is NOT onerous on business or the wealthy. It's just not.
