Gingrich And Boehner Argue Stimulus Is A ‘Failure’ That Hasn’t Created ‘A Single Job’
Gingrich And Boehner Argue Stimulus Is A ‘Failure’ That Hasn’t Created ‘A Single Job’
House Republican Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) has been one of the most vocal opponents of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. After rallying every single member of his caucus to vote against it earlier this year, Boehner has stubbornly refused to acknowledge the existence of the projects it has funded. In July, Boehner claimed there hadn’t been any stimulus related infrastructure contracts signed in all of Ohio. In reality, there had been 52 at the time of Boehner’s statement.
Last Friday, Boehner continued to press his case that the stimulus has been an utter failure. On Hugh Hewitt’s radio show, Boehner claimed the stimulus “didn’t create any jobs”:
BOEHNER: Well, I think it’s the American people who are winning this debate. They’ve looked up at this program, this giant government bureaucracy that the Democrats want to create in Washington, and said enough is enough. And while most of this is about health care, it’s really about a much bigger issue, and that is just the growth and size of government. You know, after the $1 trillion dollars stimulus bill that didn’t create any jobs, and the trillion dollars deficits for as far as the eye can see [...]
Listen here:
Echoing Boehner’s sentiment, Newt Gingrich blasted out a fundraising appeal for the right-wing group Citizens for the Republic today, attacking the stimulus as a “failure” that “hasn’t created a single job.” View it below:
Revisiting infrastructure, Boehner’s preferred type of stimulus spending, there have been 1,138 Ohio highway construction jobs in July alone fueled by the Recovery Act. And if Boehner continues to ignore Ohio officials on jobs figures, he could simply ask his own press secretary. In a little-noticed statement, Boehner’s press office praised the Obama administration for going forward with using stimulus dollars to fund “shovel-ready projects that will create much-needed jobs.”
The Council of Economic Advisers, in a report released earlier this month, called the Recovery Act the “boldest countercyclical fiscal stimulus in American history” and concluded that the stimulus added nearly 500,000 jobs to the economy in the second quarter of 2009 that would not have been there without it. Unfortunately, people like Boehner and Gingrich are more interested in stoking opposition to Obama rather than grounding their arguments in the truth.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“1,138 Ohio highway construction jobs in July alone”
pwnd!
August 31st, 2009 at 4:06 pm“hasn’t created a single job.”
Well, I guess if they mean a “single job” then they are correct…
…but if they mean “no jobs at all” then they are liars…
…but then again, lying is what Republic Fascist Party Members to best.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:11 pm“Gingrich And Boehner Argue Stimulus Is A ‘Failure’ That Hasn’t Created ‘A Single Job’”
Please… Boner and King Solomon Nwet are full of it. Pass the popcorn please… Can Boner explain to his Ohio constituents why he gets big money from the health sector and he won’t help in his own district with jobs, unemployment, etc.?:
In the House, Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, received $2 million from the health sector since 1989. That includes $641,480 from pharmaceuticals and $779,710 from the health insurance industry. He received $690,587 from health professionals, according to the center’s study.
Boehner, who is leading the Republican charge against Democratic health care proposals, has collected more money from health insurers than all current members of Congress.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:12 pmhttp://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/springfield-news/brown-boehner-get-big-money-from-health-sector-272251.html?showComments=true
Well this guy is a total idiot. All he has to do is drive or be driven through his own state and see all of the construction work being done using stimulus money (according to the signage anyway). But just like all of the other Repuglicans, he is a two faced liar and has his hand out for more under the table. What a hypocrite.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:13 pmThis is what got them beat. They beat the drums of war while our nation went without things it needed.
Now they show just how little they care about Americans. I love it.
enjoy your permanent minority status, that is if you survive at all newt and bohner.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:16 pmWhat needs to happen is that the National Media needs to immediately put forth the facts that refute what Boehner and Gingrich have said.
Here that ringing silence?
That’s your media at work….
August 31st, 2009 at 4:18 pmDumb and Dumber
August 31st, 2009 at 4:19 pmI guess that means that all those guys I passed on Pennsylvania’s highways on my way to a wedding last week were all mirages then. Geez, and they looked so busy too!
Pennsylvanians will receive approximately $16 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act signed by President Obama on February 17, 2009. This includes billions of dollars in direct relief for Pennsylvania taxpayers and more than $9.9 billion in formula-driven funding for health care, education, infrastructure, job training, housing and other aid.
They list $1.5 Billion going to TransportationInfrastructure.
http://www.recovery.pa.gov/portal/server.pt/community/recovery_pa_gov/5994
August 31st, 2009 at 4:19 pmSo what? Jeez, you guys act as if Newtie and Teh Boner have some sort of obligation to tell the truth in their public statements.
Talk about naive…
August 31st, 2009 at 4:20 pmAnd yet Bohner praised the highway jobs in his home state.
Could someone get me a schedule so I know when Bohner is against it and when he is taking credit ?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:21 pmThey Lie. That’s what they do. That’s ALL they do. They don’t care.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:21 pmSo let me get this straight…
the stimulus spending “hasn’t created a single job”…
yet it is the cause of a “trillion dollar deficit”…
so what did the government spend all those dollars on? Where did it go, and how did it not create a single job, not even by accident?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:22 pmThey also wish to ignore the sucess that the stimulus had in turning our economy around. I’m just postitive that they do not want to talk about that.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:23 pmWhy is anyone still listening to Boehner and Gingrich?
What have either of them ever been right about?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:27 pmHere we have two people…that haven’t yet realized how pathetic their rhetoric has become.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:30 pmThe solutions they offer are the same “solutions” that lead us all into the quagmire we face.
They both should seriously just STFU.
The highway I take to and from work has been under repair for months. They are totally resurfacing it. Every day I drive past a big sign that say it is being paid for by stimulus funds. Is that sign a lie?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:31 pmAlternative Newt: “More Reagan-style tax cuts — yeah, that’s what we need…and they’ll be introduced by my Secretary of the Treasury — umm — Morgan Fairchild…yeah, that’s the ticket…”
Boner and Newt — the Belushi and Aykroyd of the new millenium…
August 31st, 2009 at 4:31 pmThe stimulas bill hasn’t created a single job, for republicans in congress…
August 31st, 2009 at 4:34 pmLet’s face it. Boner and his Republiklan buddies are in it for the golf and the chicks. Oh. And to see that Obama fails, and the nation with him.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:40 pmOk, the stimulus…back up caddy, I’m on the tee box…is a fraud. No jobs that I can see from my country club. Stand back, you twit, while I swing. Nope, I can’t see anything but the fairway. Crap, I sliced into the rough. Where’s my drink?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:44 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Boner and Newt — the Belushi and Aykroyd of the new millenium…
A canard against two fine comedians. I vote for Beevis and Butthead.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pmthen the government would have no roll in “creating Jobs” though govt. jobs programs.
Cherry or lime kool aid?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:48 pmAthena, in case you haven’t noticed, the big businesses you think are god have been sending jobs overseas faster than Britney Spears changes clothes. Trickle down don’t work. Since the private sector is only interested in creating jobs overseas, someone needs to pick up the slack here at home.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:51 pmNewt s*cks Boner and Boner licks Newt. Nothing new there.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:51 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Like Bohner even cares either way. Just obligatory whining, to satisfy the conservative minority masses and secure his seat.
Bohner has more than enough corporate perks to cover his green fees and country club lifestyle. And that great government insurance.
“Golf is life, and life is good”!
(Photo Caption)
FORE!
August 31st, 2009 at 4:56 pmWith all due respect, this makes no sense.
By virtue of employing people for the duties of governance (legislators, aides, regulators, clerical staff…) government creates jobs.
By virtue of funding research (scientific, medical, military, whatever) the government creates more jobs in those sectors.
By employing craftsmen and laborers to build the infrastructure that a government needs or deems necessary for the community, more jobs are created.
Your final comment, “You are penalizing and redistributing jobs that already exist.” is the coup de grace. The reason the stimulus was proposed was that jobs had vanished and unemployment was a crisis. Where exactly were these “jobs that already exist”?
August 31st, 2009 at 4:57 pmWhy do you think they send jobs over seas?
Because they are sleezy, profit sucking slugs who have no problem with slave labor, which they would love to see re-instated in the US?
Just a guess.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:57 pmI will agree with this; Democrats seek to extend their majority status in government by serving the people’s needs.
I guess that can be seen as “political appeal”.
It’s certainly a different approach than that taken by their opponents, who seek to regain their lost majority status by convincing people that government can’t work efficiently, so they should put into power the folks who have PROVED over and over that they cannot make government work.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:00 pmWe need a strategic knockout. I am baking Ann Coulter Creme Broulees for all of the Reichwing nut jobs.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:00 pmthe government would have no roll in “creating Jobs
Would that be like a dinner roll? Or a roll for craps?
August 31st, 2009 at 5:02 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Athena = Mighty Aphrodite?
August 31st, 2009 at 5:04 pmLike the taxes that 2/3 of major corporations pay NONE of?
August 31st, 2009 at 5:04 pmYou gotta love a poster who questions an explanation because of its simplicity, and then proposes an even simpler answer.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:05 pmRepublicans have completely given up on anything that resembles truth, or reality. They say anything knowing that you can fool some of the people some of the time. It is a game of percentages where the stupid and gullible team up with the racists, throw in a little voter supression and the Republicans try to make that equal an election victory.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:06 pmOakie Dokie,
(Photo Caption)
“Now watch this drive”
-George the traitor Bush-
August 31st, 2009 at 5:06 pmRUC,
Not THE “Mitey Afro-Deity”
August 31st, 2009 at 5:06 pmWiz,
The GOP counts on the financial construct of:
August 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pm“All gaps in credibility are filled by gullible stooges.”
Its that simple? could it be taxes?
Grow up, little girl. It is about profits. Big companies dodge taxes better than a 3rd grader dodges a ball on the playground.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pmMighty AssOhMighty was so proud of her dead child and her fake law degree.
Is this moron back to kill again? Stop the murder.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:12 pmThe CEA is closer to the mark than Boehner; that’s not hard to do, since Boner is so far gone in partisanship that he can’t admit that stimulus on this side of the 1/20/2009 divide is every bit as useful as it was on the other. Even if the CEA had said “1 job added to the economy” instead of 500,000, they’d be closer to reality, which is almost certainly messier.
Gengrich Can is just taking the opportunity to do a little self-interested fundraising. He devotes more words to his own cause in that squib than he does to advocating Boner’s position.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:16 pmHere in Washington state I received a nice “raise” on my checks when I was unemployed a few months ago, money I used to catch up on bills and rent that I had fallen behind on. I now drive to work on some nice new paved roads that had long been neglected and the people who were hired to pave those roads spend some of their income on taking their families out to eat in the restaurants that employ people like me. How is that a failure?
August 31st, 2009 at 5:18 pm21. Athena says: The Government creating job myth. … If Progressives were concerned with citizens justice and equality of treatment, then the government would have no roll in “creating Jobs” …
August 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Must be the Doofus Athena rather than the Pallas Athena. Hey, Doof, it’s role, not roll.
And it isn’t a myth, it’s a simplification. Government puts stimulus money in hands of states, including states that don’t want it but take it anyway and claim credit for getting it, and then the states engage in contractual actions which results in CONTRACTORS hiring people.
And it isn’t like the contractors are competing with commercial and industrial interests for people to fill postings. Business at all levels in this country have been shedding jobs in huge quantities the last few months.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:25 pmThe Party of No is also The Party of Lies.
It’s what they do best. LIE!
Need I say more that WMD’s?
August 31st, 2009 at 5:30 pmI expect the media will play these remarks with frequency on the regular newscasts without interruption.
So, I look forward to those same comments being debunked with the facts on regular newscasts without interruption….. (crickets)
August 31st, 2009 at 5:37 pmAthena (MA)
Would kill a kid’s puppy,
if she believed it would save her 2 bucks in taxes.
(those people fear taxes like Klan Grannies fear black fellers)
August 31st, 2009 at 5:39 pmDid Athena wear out already?
Hell, that can’t be Mighty Aphrodite.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:39 pmThe job of shoveling the Capitol out of Boner’s BS could provide stimulus for half of D.C.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:57 pmMy, my… Athena proved quite a disappointment for a troll, didn’t she?
August 31st, 2009 at 6:22 pmJust more Republican delusions that Reaganomics needs to be tried again despite it massive failure which culminated in last years meltdown.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:23 pmEven if one were to deny the facts before one’s eyes and falsely claim that the stimulus created deficit without adding jobs — just how was that deficit created?
I see construction and roadwork all over my state with signs indicating they are the economic recovery funds in action. As another poster above noted, I too, went to the east coast not long ago and saw Ohio and Pennsylvania quite busy with construction projects, that I could see even without leaving the roadway.
I am so discouraged to have been proven right about repugs – when a republican talks, he lies. That’s just the way it is.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:31 pmCBO Reports that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 will add 7.13 trillion over a 10 year period. This will create whats called crowding out.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:34 pmIf the increase in government spending is financed by a tax increase, the tax increase would tend to reduce private consumption. If instead the increase in government spending is not accompanied by a tax increase, government borrowing to finance the increased government spending would increase interest rates, leading to a reduction in private investment.
Increase my taxes. Please….
August 31st, 2009 at 6:39 pmPoor Athena. She has this idea that no one is paying money for health insurance these days so there would be no money to fund a public plan. She doesn’t think that people might not mind paying 1/3 less to get the same coverage.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:45 pmdbadass says:
Increase my taxes. Please….
Why do you have to be forced to pay more in taxes? Send any extra money you have to the IRS and I’m sure they would be more than happy to accept.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:46 pmAthena’s not very good at this…
August 31st, 2009 at 6:50 pmWell, Athena is still proving to be a disappointment as a troll, but at least it’s no longer for lack of trying.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:53 pmZooey says:
Athena’s not very good at this..
Do you have an issue with the the CBO report or the economic term ‘crowding out’?
August 31st, 2009 at 6:55 pm(sigh…)
What you’re missing is the willingness expressed by dbadass is not for him to simply pay more to the government, but for the government to be willing to collect more in taxes from folks in similar economic situations (comfortable, if dbadass is to be believed, and I personally think he is.)
See the difference?
August 31st, 2009 at 6:56 pmralph the wonder llama says:
Athena says:
dbadass says:
Increase my taxes. Please….
Why do you have to be forced to pay more in taxes? Send any extra money you have to the IRS and I’m sure they would be more than happy to accept.
(sigh…)
What you’re missing is the willingness expressed by dbadass is not for him to simply pay more to the government, but for the government to be willing to collect more in taxes from folks in similar economic situations (comfortable, if dbadass is to be believed, and I personally think he is.)
See the difference?
Obama uses the term fair a lot. How is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
August 31st, 2009 at 6:59 pmHow is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
Basic math time. One person needs X in income to live comfortably. Anything beyond X tends to fit into the luxury category. When someone makes 10X, they can afford to live on 2X at a better level and still have 8X left over. So a higher tax rate isn’t a burden, takes nothing from their basic standard of living and only offends their greedy ego.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:04 pmWhy do you need to be forced to pay more taxes seems to be a better question. Do you feel overtaxed? I don’t…
August 31st, 2009 at 7:04 pmThe people I associate with who have been more financially successful are happy to contribute more. Are there some they are less willing? Sure but they are a ssholes for the most part…
August 31st, 2009 at 7:07 pmSee the difference?
I’m guessing the answer is no. Athena is probably very comfortable to have insurance CEO’s making multi million dollars in one year. AND Athena would probably do the whining for those CEO’s who don’t want to give ANY of those millions for the greater good. Athena is likely a “I got mine, go get a third job” type of person.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:08 pmUm… because they have more resources? Does that not make sense?
If that doesn’t make sense to you, how about this; the wealthy among us generally get greater value from the protections afforded our citizenry than the less affluent — statistically verifiable better outcomes in judicial proceedings, better and more responsive access to political representation, preferential treatment in terms of access to educational opportunities both private and public… that makes it fair, in my mind.
But beyond that, our nation’s economy has performed at its best during periods when progressive taxation policies held sway, and has always run into economic turmoil when tax cuts were given to the wealthiest among us. So it’s really a practical matter as much as one of justice.
A lessening of the tax burden on the wealthy has always led to a widening of the gap between rich and poor, which is damaging to our economic health. A robust middle class is the primary source of the consumer spending that makes up seventy percent of GDP, and the kind of tax policy you seem to support has always resulted in squeezing that middle class.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:10 pm54 & 60. Athena sez:…
well, huff huff, there ya go agin, or something…
I don’t have a problem with the CBO numbers, assuming you can clarify what their model assumptions are; flat economy? declining economy? rising? Which is to say, give me a break! Are they using a real forecasting model or are they simply extrapolating from the last couple of years?
There’s nothing wrong with the notion of ‘crowding out’ as an economic idea, but it’s presumptive under the circumstances. Actual crowding out or displacement requires that there be constraints in the real economy which don’t exist. We have unused capacity and resources all over the place; any “crowding out” will be very minor compared to the actual displacement that’s already happened due to market collapse, if it occurs at all.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:11 pmdbadass says:
The people I associate with who have been more financially successful are happy to contribute more. Are there some they are less willing? Sure but they are a ssholes for the most part…
Exactly. why do you have to be forced?
August 31st, 2009 at 7:12 pmHow is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
You can remove those probably’s from my last post. Clearly Athena believes CEO’s sitting in a board room dreaming up ways to deny coverage and being rewarded millions is far more important than the construction worker who now has health issues because he worked hard labour for 25 years and can’t get the care he needs because working hard labour for 25 years is a pre-existing condition and his pay had to go towards the health of his children.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:13 pmWell said, Hooda. Much more concise than me.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:13 pmAthena, lets go real basic. The President of the United States, the toughest job on the planet, pays less than a half million a year. You are saying that running an insurance company justifies a CEO to make a million dollars a month?
August 31st, 2009 at 7:16 pmSo… are you seeking to discuss tax policy, or the personal financial planning of dbadass?
Seems like the latter to me. Is that because your tax policy ideas have crumbled under reasonable scrutiny?
August 31st, 2009 at 7:16 pmI don’t have to be forced I just need to be asked. Why do you need to be forced? Are you cheap or broke or both?
August 31st, 2009 at 7:20 pmOh, didnt yall here? Some physics high texture brainer figured out that the recession was over on January 19th at exackatally 11:59.00.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 PM
August 31st, 2009 at 7:26 pmLets take this one step further. Insurance company CEO’s are pulling down the mill a month salaries. Average people are paying a grand or two a month for coverage, shelling out 2-5k in deductibles on top of that when the insurance companies decide to give back some of the money they have been entrusted with.
And we have people who are ready to revolt to keep this happening?
Folks, don’t be afraid of big bad government trying to take over your lives. You obviously have given it all away already.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:27 pmlivelongandprosper says: How is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
Reagan said it doesnt matter.
Maybe Were gonna have a fifty year jubilee!!! Wooo!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(Christian)
August 31st, 2009 at 7:34 pmI am glad these two pillars of the people have helped as much as they can . Newt is helping the printing industry by getting his fund raising information printed up and John Boehner paid ten bucks for a caddie. I think for two leaders of the Republican party to be so devoid of ideas at this critical juncture in time is shameful. Newt is a puff fish and Boehner is a light weight. The big problem is that they both just don’t care.How can Boehner not think health care is important, especially in his state which has high unemployment. It is time for all Congresspeople to stands up and be counted.Both sides of the aisle have to show their constituents they will stand up for them against the corporate structured health care giants.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:35 pmdbadass, I’d like your thoughts on this theory:
I suspect that Athena has gotten herself off in a rhetorical ditch, trying to paint you as a hypocrite for calling for more progressive taxation while being reluctant to pay “more than your share”.
It seems a curious tactic, and one far afield of the point she seems to want to make about tax policy. In fact it really has nothing at all to do with tax policy. It’s just a clumsy attempt to attack the credibility of a challenger. But I guess if you’ve got nothing left to throw at the people chasing you, you finally toss your gun at them. It never works, though, does it? Not in the movies I see, anyway.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:38 pmCause you gotta create $$291 trillion to the FED for your does better financially foke.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:42 pmThe bright side: we added to the national debt. One step closer to bankruptcy.
U.S. National Debt: $11.4 Trillion
August 31st, 2009 at 7:51 pmralph I think the most simple explaination is that we got us a tax whiner…The issue seems to have little to do with the intricacies of the tax code and more to do with a desire to whine about paying for a complex society which benefits the all…
August 31st, 2009 at 7:52 pmHikwsventures.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:55 pmWhereas you built that business with the sweat of your brow, I thought you might want to direct me to your web presence so I can see if I wish to buy whatever it is that you produce…
Thanks
The five biggest derivatives dealers in the U.S. — JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Citigroup Inc. — held 95 percent of the $291 trillion in notional derivatives value of the country’s 25 largest bank holding companies at the end of the first quarter, according to a report by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. More than 90 percent of those derivatives were traded over the counter, the OCC data show.
You know, those better financially folk have my best interests at heart, there are gonna try to sell this stuff and yanno, [sniff] that they are really hurting, so [wipes tear] yanno, dammit, they should get more of my ten dollar an hour job. People shouldnt sterotype 291 trillion as greedy, thats wrong. [Sobs] Leave the mo better alonnnnnnnnnee!!
August 31st, 2009 at 7:56 pmkwsventures says: The bright side: we added to the national debt. One step closer to bankruptcy.
Well,IIRC there was a GAO report back in la la land [2006] about that bankrupt stuff. Cheney said debts dont matter
August 31st, 2009 at 8:00 pmWhen Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion. That’s a difference of $4.97 trillion
Huh, whaddyerknoboutdat
August 31st, 2009 at 8:04 pmGingrich & Boehner: 2 GOP tools with no intelligence, no facts, no understanding, no honesty. They are big fat liars, who never read any policy, never understood any issue, & lie, lie, lie to promote REpub racism & bigotry. It’s the Repub way: “I love your money, I’ll take your money, I’ll say I was responsible for taking your money, & then I’ll say your money is useless & did nothing for me. Bloody hypocrites & liars.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:04 pmSo… we can be assured that you made a big commotion when the Bush tax cuts and war spending pushed that National Debt from $5.2 T to $10.6 T?
August 31st, 2009 at 8:15 pmI stand corrected. Xisithrus is right: Bush inherited a National Debt of $5.7 T, not $5.2 T as I suggested.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:18 pmAthena says:
Why do you think they send jobs over seas?
So they can save money by exploiting children, paying subhuman wages and poisoning everything in sight.
.
Athena says:
Its that simple? could it be taxes?
Nope, it’s being able to pay pennies on the dollar, abuse workers and dump waste chemicals wherever they want. Taxes only apply to profits, not net expenses. The cut in net expenses allowed by “slash-and-burn” operations is vastly greater than any tax saving would be. In fact, the tax difference doesn’t even cover the costs of transportation there and back.
.
Athena says:
This will create whats called crowding out…
I see your specious economic theory you read somewhere and raise you a Krugman.
.
Athena says:
…government borrowing to finance the increased government spending would increase interest rates, leading to a reduction in private investment.
Good, we’ve had way to much investment capital sloshing around Wall street, with not enough actual economic activity for them to invest in. When you’ve got leveraged derivitaves skyrocketing in perceived value independently of the actual asset value, you’ve got a “bubble” situation being inflated by a surplus of investment capital.
.
Athena says:
Obama uses the term fair a lot. How is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
They aren’t higher taxes, they’re just the end of lowering those taxes. The taxes are going back to where they used to be. How is lower taxes for one group fair just because they do better financially?
August 31st, 2009 at 8:23 pmIt hasn’t put me to work. I am working 4 part-time jobs right now.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:25 pmSays the man with the orange skin…
August 31st, 2009 at 8:26 pmOOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOO
I’VE GOT A PERFECT PUZZLE FOR YOU
OOMPA LOOMPA, DOOMPADAH DEE
IF YOU ARE WISE YOU’LL LISTEN ME
Also needing mentioning is the impact the stimulus is having on the budget deficit. Back in January/February the CBO was projecting a $1.8T deficit for FY 2009 and a couple of weeks ago they lowered that projection to $1.6T. Something happened to cause those numbers to improve dramatically and the stimulus is front and center in that effort. The funny part is that with almost every passing day a new statistic just proves more clearly just how wrong the Boehner crowd is. They now look downright foolish.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:31 pmWell, blclem, are you in a line of work that would benefit from government spending? You know… construction, design, IT… something like that?
August 31st, 2009 at 8:36 pmAthena says:
Obama uses the term fair a lot. How is higher taxes fair because someone does better financially?
Fair and equitable is not a mathematical computation. The higher taxes for the upper 1% per cent will be no higher than they were under Clinton. The poor and middle class lost ground while the upper 1% got extraordinarily rich during the great Reaganomics experiment. The upper 1% disproportionately benefited from all the tax cuts and now must they must bear a fair share.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:53 pmComes from believing the economy is a zero-sum game, and that for someone to win, everyone else must, necessarily lose. This seems to be the Republican party’s understanding of the world.
The economy is a mutually-agreed-upon hallucination. A bunch of numbers and statistics made up to fit a series of equations does not help real live human beings. After all, what backs the 20 you have in your wallet – the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government? What does that really mean?
We can be the change! We voted in overwhelming (just quieter) numbers our conscience for a new direction, and I believe we have, in our President, the potential for that change. OK — he’s not the be-all and end-all all the progressives thought he would be. Do you really think a thoroughly progressive candidate would have stood a snowball’s chance in hell? Our President is a centrist, as are most of the citizenry of the US. He’s also only been in office since January, and, with all the sh!t he inherited from the previous administration, to me, it’s a wonderful credit to his smarts that he’s been able to do as much as he has.
Our economy sucks, folks. Give the man some patience! (even speaking as one who’s really trying to keep Wachovia from foreclosing! if I can be patient, can you not?!)
August 31st, 2009 at 9:12 pmI wonder why they didnt think of that when borrowing money for two wars for six years now.
August 31st, 2009 at 9:47 pmSo tell me if Only 70 Billion of the stimulus had been spent how is it that his stimulus could be working. When you factor in that 13 Billion of that went to Administration in one-time $250 checks to current Social Security recipients. Not to mention didn’t Obama say that the Stimulus Bill didn’t contain any pork.
February 17, 2009 in Denver, Co.
“What I am signing, then, is a balanced plan with a mix of tax cuts and investments. It is a plan that’s been put together without earmarks or the usual pork-barrel spending. And it is a plan that will be implemented with an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability.”
Obama also said this when he was signing the Bill. “While this package is mostly composed of critical investments, it also includes aid to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of firefighters or police recruits — recruits like the ones in Columbus, Ohio, who were told that instead of being sworn in as officers, they would be let go”
And how many states are closing their governments for periods because they don’t have the money to run them.
He also said this.
“As a whole, this plan will help poor and working Americans pull themselves into the middle class in a way we haven’t seen in nearly 50 years.”
So tell me just how many of you have seen any of the stimulus.
Yup his stimulus is really working. To bad it isn’t going out and what is isn’t going to the jobs or the people.
You people have been lied to and you just keep sucking up his kool aid.
He said that he was going to produce 2.5 million jobs by 2011.
“When Obama first floated the plan in his Weekly Address via YouTube on November 21st, he said [1:20 in] “I have already directed my economic team to come up with an economic recovery plan that will mean 2.5 million more jobs by January of 2011.”
Was that before unemployment went to nearly 10% or after it got that low. Because if it is after it hits 10% then he isn’t going to be producing any jobs. THe jobs that he “produces” is going to be jobs that he cost.
So if they have only spent 70 Billion as of Aug.5, 2009 and a fifth of it has been on Social Security then what has his stimulus actually done. I am willing to bet that the money that TP and all you libs keep talking about that these states have been getting is earmarks. Not to mention I don’t know how many of you work with the government when it comes to contracts but they don’t get anything done in a day or a month. They have things planned out and take bids for 6 months to a year which would meant that all these jobs that these states are starting have been on the table for a while and they are not a result of Obama and his stimulus.
August 31st, 2009 at 11:12 pmSorry to burst your liberal bubbles.
pags2 says
Fair and equitable is not a mathematical computation. The higher taxes for the upper 1% per cent will be no higher than they were under Clinton. The poor and middle class lost ground while the upper 1% got extraordinarily rich during the great Reaganomics experiment. The upper 1% disproportionately benefited from all the tax cuts and now must they must bear a fair share.
Do you have any clue what your taxes are going to be next year when the “Bush tax cut” is not renewed?
Here I will help you out.
During Clinton the lowest tax rate was 15% (married and earning 0 – $43,850. Bush cut it to 10% (married and earning 0 – $16,050). Which means in 2010 your taxes at the lowest level will be 15% for the feds. And Bush gave just the rich a break. Yeah right.
Clinton taxes Single – 28%!!!!! – $26,250 – $63,580.
Bush taxes 2008 – Single – 25% – $32,450 – $78,850
the 25% top end bracket raised to $78,850!!!! up from the Clinton top rate of $63,580 where you would jump up to 31% tax rate.
If you can understand that then here
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Taxes under Bush 2008 Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Clinton Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Bush Single making 50K – tax $12,500
Clinton Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Bush Single making 75K – tax $18,750
Clinton Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Bush Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Clinton Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Bush Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Clinton Married making 125K – tax $38,750
Bush Married making 125K – tax $31,250
And this is what everyones taxes are going to roll back to in 2010 when they don’t renew the tax cuts of Bush. Not only that but Obama has said that they are going to raise taxes. Nice. And you people just keep going right along with it until they raise your taxes and find out they lied to you AGAIN.
August 31st, 2009 at 11:35 pmBush didn’t just help the rich his tax cut benefited everyone, you people are just to stupid to see it.
Outlaw284 says:
Bush didn’t just help the rich his tax cut benefited everyone, you people are just to stupid to see it.
____________
Gee… you’re charming… in a ’steaming cow flop in the road’ kind of way…
Okay… so here’s a link to Snopes about cow flop’s tax chart.
Hmmm… Snopes says this is”partially true” but too simplified and “offers only a small glimpse of a much larger and complex whole”.
BTW… the numbers cow flop posted are someoen else’s work. cow flop should have the decency to sight his source. Kinda looks like plagiarism otherwise.
Let’s see what some other sources say about the Bush tax cuts…
From The New York Times…
Tax Cuts Offer Most for Very Rich, Study Says
Based on an exhaustive analysis of tax records and census data, the study reinforced the sense that while Mr. Bush’s tax cuts reduced rates for people at every income level, they offered the biggest benefits by far to people at the very top — especially the top 1 percent of income earners.
But hey… we all know the Times is a hotbed of liberal whoremongering, huh?
Who else to touch bases w/?
How about The Center On Budget and Policy Priorities
Hmmm… what does it say here?
Tax Cuts: Myths and Realities
That is, once the need to pay for the tax cuts is taken into account, the 2001 and 2003 “tax cuts” are best seen as net tax cuts for the top 20 percent of households, as a group, financed by net tax increases or benefit reductions for the remaining 80 percent of households, as a group.
Oh well… no doubt clow flop knows better than The New York Times and The Center On Budget and Policy Priorities…
What say you, cow flop?
September 1st, 2009 at 12:14 amblclem says:
It hasn’t put me to work. I am working 4 part-time jobs right now.
____________
I’m guessing:
Burger King, KFC, Applebee’s, and Seven/Eleven?
September 1st, 2009 at 12:16 amOutlaw… a question.
Do you know what the term ‘earmarks’ means?
September 1st, 2009 at 12:19 amI notice Outhouse posts (simplistic) numbers for relative tax burdens under Clinton and under Bush.
Let’s see… which economic conditions would we rather have…?
September 1st, 2009 at 12:53 amLeaving aside the classic troll pratfall of calling others “stupid” while misspelling simple words, our trollish friend fails to recognize that the promised prosperity to be delivered on the heels of the Bush tax cuts never materialized.
Real wages were stagnant over that period. GDP growth was largely the result of increased consumer and government debt, not economic growth. The gap between rich and poor in this country widened enormously, until the rich controlled a greater share of the national wealth than at any time since the 1920s.
In short, the Bush era that Outhouse seems to want to present as some sort of economic golden age was in fact a bust for the nation. Supply side economics doesn’t work, except for the rich. And folks like Outhouse are foolish enough to believe the rich when they tell him, “no, just trust us; it’s better this way”.
September 1st, 2009 at 1:00 amralph the wonder llama says:
Leaving aside the classic troll pratfall of calling others “stupid” while misspelling simple words…
_________
But he never fails to entertain, does he?
September 1st, 2009 at 1:16 amOutlaw284 says:
Your contention that everyone’s taxes will go up is wrong. Only the tax cuts for the very rich are being repealed. As I said before, the very rich benefited disproportionate from the tax cuts. The middle and poor were thrown peanuts while the rich looted the US treasury with their tax cuts. It is time for them to pay a fair share which does not necessarily mean the same levels of taxation. The very rich must pay for the privilege of being able to get very rich.
September 1st, 2009 at 1:28 amOutlaw284 says:
Obama also said this when he was signing the Bill. “While this package is mostly composed of critical investments, it also includes aid to state and local governments…
And how many states are closing their governments for periods because they don’t have the money to run them.
Obviously then it would have been worse without the stimulus bill.
.
Outlaw284 says:
“As a whole, this plan will help poor and working Americans pull themselves into the middle class in a way we haven’t seen in nearly 50 years.”
So tell me just how many of you have seen any of the stimulus.
What you don’t understand is that it has secondary ripple effects throughout the economy. Economists call this “a multipler.” Go look up any textbook on economics before coming in here and bellowing incoherently at us, thanks.
.
Outlaw284 says:
He said that he was going to produce 2.5 million jobs by 2011.
It’s August 2008. Buy a calendar while you’re out getting edumacated, thanks.
.
Outlaw284 says:
THe jobs that he “produces” is going to be jobs that he cost.
There was a very large economic crash in 2008, due to the policies of the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress. As a wingnut, I understand you may not be aware of what happens in the outside world, so I thought we should break it to you now before you embarrass yourself any further.
.
Outlaw284 says:
So if they have only spent 70 Billion as of Aug.5, 2009 and a fifth of it has been on Social Security then what has his stimulus actually done.
Injected extra money into the economy. Once it starts changing hands, everyone will benefit.
.
Outlaw284 says:
I am willing to bet that the money that TP and all you libs keep talking about that these states have been getting is earmarks.
The contents of the stimulus package are a matter of public record. It doesn’t contain any earmarks. That’s a matter of public fact. So how much were you willing to bet against a fact that’s publicly demonstrable?
.
Outlaw284 says:
They have things planned out and take bids for 6 months to a year which would meant that all these jobs that these states are starting have been on the table for a while and they are not a result of Obama and his stimulus.
Most likely most of the specific spending items are things that have been in the planning stage for years, that is true. Years being blocked by Republicans from approval. Approving them therefore constitutes doing something.
September 1st, 2009 at 2:59 amOutlaw284 says:
Do you have any clue what your taxes are going to be next year when the “Bush tax cut” is not renewed?
Yes, the same as during the Clinton administration. Remember how the economy was during the Clinton administration? I’d rather be able to make more money by participating in a strong economy and have a slightly higher tax rate – or even better, pay a higher tax rate because I’m in a higher bracket – then have less taxes taken out of an income spiraling towards nothing.
You can have the lowest taxes you want, but if nobody’s making any money, that doesn’t do them any good.
.
Outlaw284 says:
Not only that but Obama has said that they are going to raise taxes.
Do you have a citation for that statement? Like, from an actual news source of any kind?
.
Outlaw284 says:
Bush didn’t just help the rich his tax cut benefited everyone, you people are just to stupid to see it.
Oh yes, so many benefits we got from the total collapse of the economy in 2008. I must be too stupid to see how rich everybody got? I guess so…
September 1st, 2009 at 3:03 amMan these people are idiots…
They do realize that Q1 GDP was -6.9% and Q2 GDP was -1%. As an economist, this is an incredible improvement. What the hell do they think caused this? Magic? Elves? No, it was government spending money on domestic programs, instead of $10 billion a month fighting a war.
September 1st, 2009 at 10:51 amWhy people of modest means continue to defend the “right” of the ultra wealthy to not pay a fair amount of taxes is baffling to me. It must be because they believe they are going to be rich someday themselves. Guess what folks, your not. If you are of the middle or working class there is a 99.9999999999% chance you will stay that way until you die. Quite fighting for these wealthy people who don’t care about you. If by some tiny chance you do become rich and feel no obligation to give back to the society that made it possible for you to get rich in the first place then I will support raising your taxes too. Don’t worry, you’ll still be rich afterward.
September 1st, 2009 at 5:46 pmThe Republic of Stupidity
Here let me help you out. Since this is from the IRS and it is their numbers.
The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $66,532) earned 68.7 percent of the nation’s income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.6 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $410,096) earned approximately 22.8 percent of the nation’s income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 40.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid more in federal individual income taxes than the bottom 95 percent of tax returns.
And you say that the rich got a break. Right.
pags2
September 1st, 2009 at 9:44 pmYour statement shows that you have no clue when it comes to taxes. Maybe if you were to read more then you would know that the top 1% pay the most in taxes. But then I wouldn’t expect any of you libs to understand that because it doesn’t fit your little kool aid world that your leaders have told you.
After seval talks with my CPA he has advised me to close my business down before Obamanomics realy come into play, or I had better find tons of “write offs” because i’ll never be able to afford to pay the taxes and feed my family (let alone pay him) at the same time.
also these road projects have been in the planning for a long time, as a frieght relocating specalist, it behoves me to stay up on all that stuff, so i can get around it, if i can
September 1st, 2009 at 10:24 pmoh-ya for the record– under slick Willy i made no money at all– i lived pay check to pay check, under President Bush I did pretty darn good, now we’ll see how i do under Berry, if i can hold out till he is gone
September 1st, 2009 at 10:31 pmElBruce
You really have no clue do you.
The states problem goes back to past state decisions about taxes and expenditures. In otherwords Poor management.
As to “secondary ripple effects”. There hasn’t been enough money put into the economy for that to happen. 70 Billion wont do a thing as big as this country is and as big as the problem is.
For Obama to produce 2.5 million jobs by 2011 he will have to produce the jobs that were lost to make that number even real which means producing about 10 million jobs between now and the end of 2011. Sorry your dreaming, he wont do it. He hasn’t even produced one job right now other then his Czars.
The Crash being Bush’s fault is a joke. The Stock Market was mostly from Speculators and the Housing Market was from Freddie and Fannie giving loans to “High Risk” people that they knew wouldn’t be able to get a loan anywhere. And Freddie and Fannie were a cluster of Carter and Clinton.
Not to mention why weren’t you crying about Reins getting 90 million in bonuses and Daniel Mudd.
Daniel Mudd received $12.2 million in total compensation in 2007. Mudd’s pay included his $990,000 salary, a $2.23 million bonus and a $9 million “long-term incentive” award. In 2006, Mudd received a $3.5 million bonus and a long-term incentive award of about $10 million. I guess it is different when it is a DEMOCRAT that is running things and getting the big money right.
Once again the 70 Billion isn’t enough to stimulate anything let alone get to anyone elses hands other then the ones that got it.
The Stimulus not containing any earmarks is a joke. Obama’s stimulus bill contains 9,287 earmarks at a cost of $28.9 billion.
How about this. $24.5 million for the National Drug Intelligence Center [NDIC], in Johnstown, PA or this $1.75 million for a Heritage Center in San Francisco.
Here is a list of the “earmarks in Obama’s Stimulus Bill
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/upload/porktable.html
As to the Republicans blocking the states from doing road repairs and anything else in their own state. That is the best joke of all. The states don’t control what they spend their money on. The only money the Feds can put limits on is the money that the Feds give them. Case in point. Highway dollars. California hasn’t gotten any federal funding for its Interstates because it refuses to bring the speed limit within a 10 mile an hour gap for cars and trucks. Federal Laws states that you will not recieve any federal funding for Interstates if you have a speed limit gap of more then 10 miles an hour for cars and trucks. That is why Oregon and other states have a 10 mile an hour gap so they can get the funding from the Feds. Bet you didn’t know that did you.
Now if no one was making any money then there wouldn’t be any businesses selling anything and there wouldn’t be any businesses showing any profit. And yet there are a lot of businesses showing a profit. SO much fo rnot making anything. Oh and I am sure that everyone was just happy as a clown when Carter was in office. I guess no one made any money then either.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 amThe states don’t control what they spend their money on.
My mistake I typed that wrong it should be this.
The Feds don’t control what the states spend their money on.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:19 am