Is Bachmann a flake?

[rCoder]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

That's right. If we took 1000, $9 an hour jobs and reduced the pay to $4.50, that would create 1000 new jobs. But why stop there? We could employ 3000 people for the same money if we reduced the pay to $3 per hour!

Spreading the wealth; The republican way!

Take that same $9 an hour job, tax half of it, leaves the company only $4.50 to pay for the job, so they out source to China, adding another person to the U.S. unemployment role, the federal government is losing money on the deal, so they borrow from China to make up for it.

Spreading the wealth; The democratic way!

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by rCoder

Take that same $9 an hour job, tax half of it, leaves the company only $4.50 to pay for the job, so they out source to China, adding another person to the U.S. unemployment role, the federal government is losing money on the deal, so they borrow from China to make up for it.

Spreading the wealth; The democratic way!

rCoder, there is a significant difference between your "democratic way" plan and Munchmasterman's "Republican way" plan.

For example, one of the leading announced 2012 Republican candidates for the White House has suggested a "plan" very similar to his "Republican way" post. I have yet to see a Democratic candidate for the White House suggest anything that even closely resembles your "democratic way" fabrication!

Just sayin'!

[Yssup Rider]

Yeah, but is anybody willing to claim that Michele Bachmann isn't a freak?

Get your answers in fast before I get banned by the Attack Pack!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

http://www.startribune.com/nation/124575423.html

I used to get up every Mon through Sat at 5:30 am to deliver the Tribune. Remember the postal mantra of "gloom of night" and a bunch of stuff I can't remember will keep him from his appointed rounds? A paper boy didn't get 20 holidays a year off. If it was -20 degrees at noon, it was -25 at 6 am.

Now I live in Texas

[rCoder]

Hmmm, just today, the news had Pelosi and Obama calling for tax hikes as part of the "negotiation" on raising the debt limit. On out sourcing jobs, just look where the manufacturing jobs are (interesting side note, also look at the education systems, the support jobs, the engineering jobs, even the financial job that followed the manufacturing jobs overseas). Then compare the migration with U.S. government growth, particularly the total cost of government (includes all taxes and the cost of complying with laws and regulations). On the borrowing, again, that's why they want to raise the debt limit, so they can borrow more.

Parody, yes. Just too damn much truth in it.

Hell, neither the Rs or the Ds understand that the only solution is to create a free market in the the U.S., then let the market find the equilibrium point.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by rCoder

Take that same $9 an hour job, tax half of it, leaves the company only $4.50 to pay for the job, so they out source to China, adding another person to the U.S. unemployment role, the federal government is losing money on the deal, so they borrow from China to make up for it.

Spreading the wealth; The democratic way!

No such tax, there isn't one like that proposed or in the works, and service jobs are pretty fixed here.

If you recall, business taxes have remained the same for some time (since 2003). Anybody who relocated or out sourced jobs during that time did it to make money by saving on labor or materials. They love it when you believe the reason is taxes. Just like now. "How can we create jobs when taxes are so high?" The tax rates have been stable and at or near historical lows for 8 years.

When the fuck are they going to create these jobs!?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by rCoder

Hmmm, just today, the news had Pelosi and Obama calling for tax hikes as part of the "negotiation" on raising the debt limit. On out sourcing jobs, just look where the manufacturing jobs are (interesting side note, also look at the education systems, the support jobs, the engineering jobs, even the financial job that followed the manufacturing jobs overseas)

Austin will give a company $300 million in tax breaks to build a wafer fab here.
New York state will give them $700 million to build it in Fishkill.
Taiwan will give them 10 years of breaks that add up to $1.5 Billion.

Guess where it gets built and the future engineering and support staffs come from? (A hint: It's not Austin)

And since we don't want our federal government involved, that is how we lose manufacturing. Countries are willing to pay more than we can.

Or labor costs. Many of the manufacturing jobs were held by union workers. We know what the republicans think of union workers.

Which brings us to why haven't the republican controlled house put forth any job creating legislation? Why? Because they want to wait until after the 2012 elections. They don't give a shit about anything but winning the elections. So we can find out that everything was Obama's fault. He fucked things up so bad there is no easy way out. Till we figure something out, we'll just cut taxes so corporate profits will skyrocket, they still won't create jobs here but maybe they would if only taxes were even lower

[rCoder]

Don't forget that the feds give companies tax breaks for outsourcing overseas.

I read an article a few years ago that explored the reasoning why. It basically boiled down to the fact that manufacturing economies are cyclic by nature (boom to bust) while service economies are more consistent. The feds wanted a steadier income base so intentionally encouraged the switch from manufacturing to service economies.

[F-Sharp]

Originally Posted by rCoder

Hmmm, just today, the news had Pelosi and Obama calling for tax hikes as part of the "negotiation" on raising the debt limit.

Do the math. Rasing taxes is THE ONLY WAY to get us out of debt and there is no negotiation that needs to take place in that regard. You'd have to cut 50% of our budget just to break even and cover the 9% interest we're paying on our current National debt. You know what accounts for more than 50% of our total U.S. expenditure? Defense, Medicare and Social Security. Anyone who thinks we're going to get out of debt without raising taxes (Boehner, Ryan, O'Connell, Cantor, any current member of the Tea Party) is a fool and must have failed 5th grade math.

[F-Sharp]

By the by:

An annotated bat-shit crazy guide to the economics of Michele Bachmann

[googol^googol]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

I used to get up every Mon through Sat at 5:30 am to deliver the Tribune. Remember the postal mantra of "gloom of night" and a bunch of stuff I can't remember will keep him from his appointed rounds? A paper boy didn't get 20 holidays a year off. If it was -20 degrees at noon, it was -25 at 6 am.

Paperboy respect.
Had my route done before school through Nebraska winters.

[rCoder]

Originally Posted by F-Sharp

You'd have to cut 50% of our budget just to break even and cover the 9% interest we're paying on our current National debt.

BINGO!

There is a real simple way to cut that and more. Just eliminate all programs not authorized by the Constitution. Private industry (preferably) or the states (reluctantly) will fill the worthwhile voids.

[Booth]

Originally Posted by rCoder

BINGO!

There is a real simple way to cut that and more. Just eliminate all programs not authorized by the Constitution. Private industry (preferably) or the states (reluctantly) will fill the worthwhile voids.

Look for massive tax increases by the states if that happens.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by googol^googol

Paperboy respect.
Had my route done before school through Nebraska winters.

I have had a job since I was 12 years olds. 41 years of tax returns.

[F-Sharp]

Originally Posted by rCoder

BINGO!

There is a real simple way to cut that and more. Just eliminate all programs not authorized by the Constitution. Private industry (preferably) or the states (reluctantly) will fill the worthwhile voids.

Unless you intend on passing legislation forcing every United States employer to provide both pension and medical insurance for life, cutting Medicare and Social Security is not realistic. And besides, as already stated the difference would be made up in State taxes or inflation instead of Federal taxes. You're gonna pay it one way or another. Unfortunately, your plan would cost quite a few jobs where say repealing George Jr's tax cuts and implementing a 4% Clinton era tax hike would cost...well, 4% of profits and wont be putting anyone out of business.