So why do you make all those disparaging references about Obama? How does that make anyone better? It sets a poor example for young people by my thinking. Are you Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde?
By the way, if lower taxes mean more jobs why ...." If so, those expectations were sadly unmet after the tax cuts of George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6% during the Clinton administration, the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much."
Pedro Pedro Pedro
If you and the rest of the liberals want to create jobs, please I beg of you take the 1 minute and listen to Peter Schiff talking about Henry Ford while testifing before Congress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTOetm75b8w Small government small government small government. See Henry Ford could pay his workers enough that they could afford the product they were making and listen to the taxes they weren`t paying!!! I really hope you liberals are intrigued enough to seek out the rest of Peter`s testimony...You`ll learn something!
Re: Listening to all the rants about cutting business taxes.
Actually, CEO's care more about the voting board and the share prices of their company than they do about the employees of their companies. It's the voting board of the company that actually determines the worth of the CEO. Greed may very well be our biggest problem, but let's be honest and recognize it for what it is. Greed has been around for centuries. I often wonder how much GE stock is owned by those standing in the unemployment lines via their 401 K's?
Re: Pedro Pedro Pedro
BA, it's like an old acquaintance I ran into on Wednesday, who after a long life of loyalty to the OLD Republican party has become a raving progressive...something he says is about his grand kids and their finding meaningful employment and building a life for themselves, hesaid sarcasticly to me over coffee...."Why the he!! don't the Republican propose reducing taxes to ZERO on everything. If you follow their logic, wouldn't that would most certainly mean that everybody would have a job?."
Hard to beleive the number of things that the GOP leadership is suddenly against that they once proposed and pushed and voted for. Get Obama at any cost is tearing this land apart. There is a cancerous inablitly to even hold conversations, much less objectively analyze the facts and conditions on the ground. It's making reasonably intelligent people stupid.
In Ford's time, it quite likely that over half the working public was essentially self employed. Most of them small scale agriculturists. "employement" as measured today was incalcuable. His direct invovlvement was rather early on in the industrial revolution.
But Schif and Ford are right about the fact that strong economies need demand. Sagging demand is a big part of what ails ours and much of the world today.
And there are tangential beneifts to reduced consumption of alot of things. It's just that reduction really messes up an economy that has been supercharged on private debt that has now lost or more of it's fragile securitization that was never anything more than thin air in the first place.. Something's got to give. The stuff is starting to rot and smell.
Skip a rope
First, I am on dialup so I don't do video or audio. ( Can you provide me with a written transcript?) Second from my link, we had more jobs created under Clinton and higher tax rates than under Bush with his lower tax rate. Schiff may or may not be smart, but his opinion does not trump what really happened. History seems to be an even worse subject for Conservatives than science.
Ain't it kind of funny how the record for job growth has been much better under Democrat (Liberal) presidents than under Republican (Conservative) presidents?
Re: Skip a rope
I would argue that the best times were with a conservative Congress, and a moderate President.
The budgets that Clinton proposed/submitted didn't show a surplus. It was a fiscally conservative Congress that actually wasted less money than first anticipated that gave us the best budgets.
I think Congress has more to do with it than many give them credit, as they are the ones who do or do not load an extra thousand pages of spending on every bill that goes through.
Re: Skip a rope
Here`s some highlights of Schiff`s testimony : He was actually FINED $500,000 for hiring too many employees, then he had legal defense expenses. Peter pays 35% Fed tax, 3%SS/Med, 7% Connecticut state tax for a total of 45% in tax Not including property and sales taxes. If it gets any worse why won`t he move overseas? To hire you need No.1 Profits No.2 capital, right now with madatory bennefits and taxes employers are looking to keep from hiring, all this uncertainty is not a incentive to hire. Here`s the full 23 min of his testemony
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BHLguFEN3M If you can go to a library or a friend`s house, Pedro go to You Tube type in "peter schiff testimony congress" you`ll learn more real knowledge than 50ys of listening to that MSN crap. On Clinton`s booming economy with high taxes. We were in a `tech bubble` stocks of companies you never heard of went up 50%/yr it was crazy times in the 90`s The tech bubble burst one year before GW Bush took office, 7 months after Bush took office 9/11 hit and to stay out of a DEPRESSION the US economy was goosed with money creating a false prosperity, hindsight we should`ve taken out medicine.
Re: Pedro Pedro Pedro
Hey Bruce, Schiff didn`t touch on this but, this free trade run amuck is the elephant in the room. We`ve essentially lost our manufacturing base, it`s now a service economy where you need 3 part-time jobs to survive and the old lady need 3 jobs as well and if they have kids they qualify for food stamps. The goofy part is we have 20 million illegals doing "jobs that Americans WON`T do" so we`re are country with only `jobs that Americans won`t do`....ahh Good Luck with that.
Re: Skip a rope
One of the advantages of print over audio-video is fact checking is easier.
"I was even fined fifteen thousand dollar expressly for hiring too many brokers in 2008. In the process I incurred more than $500,000 in legal bills to mitigate a more severe regulatory outcome as a result of hiring too many workers."
Reading at the two websites below, it sounds like complying with NASD Rule 1017 is no more difficult than getting your farm payments. Mr. Schiff is blaming the regulator for his forgetting to comply. Do you blame your FSA if you forget to comply with their requirements?
This much I agree with: Schiff:
"Interest rates are much too low. Cheap money produced both the stock market and real estate bubbles, and is currently facilitating a bubble in government debt. When this bubble bursts the repercussions will dwarf the shock produced by the financial crisis of 2008. Interest rates must be raised to bring on a badly needed restructuring of our economy. No doubt an environment of higher rates will cause short-term pain. But we need to move from a "borrow and spend" economy to a "save and produce" economy. This cannot be done with ultra-low interest rates. In the short-term GNP will need to contract. There will be a pickup in transitory unemployment. Real estate and stock prices will fall. Many banks will fail. There will be more foreclosures. Government spending will have to be slashed. Entitlements will have to be cut. Many voters will be angry. But such an environment will lay the foundation upon which a real recovery can be built.
The government must allow our bubble economy to fully deflate. Asset prices, wages, and spending must fall, interest rates, production, and savings must rise. Resources, including labor, must be reallocated away from certain sectors, such as government, services, finance, health care, and educations, and be allowed to into manufacturing, mining, oil and gas, agriculture, and other goods producing fields. We will never borrow and spend our way out of a crisis caused by too much borrowing and spending. The only way out is to reverse course".
Me: TARP and FED policies have only covered up rot in our "too big to fail" banking system. Until it is exposed and disposed of our economy will continue to stagnate because the banks are afraid to lend where any risk is involved because further losses would jeopardize the coverup. Neither Republicans nor Democrats will succeed in mending the economy until Bernanke and his benefactors/ees fess up. That part of Austrian economics I agree with. I did not see nor have I studied Obamas jobs plan because it cannnot work (nor will deregulation and tax cuts work) until this root problem is dealt with.
"To create conditions that foster growth, the government should balance the budget with major cuts in government spending, severely reform and simplify the tax code. It would be preferable if all corporate and personal taxes could be replaces by a national sales tax. Our current tax system discourages the activities that we need most: hard work, production, savings, investment, and risk taking. Instead it incentivizes consumption and debt. We should tax people when they spend their wealth, not when they create it."
Me: The problem with taxing wealth when it is spent rather than when it is created is that the less income you earn the greater will be the percentage you spend for necessities and therefore such a tax puts an undue burden on the less weathy among us. Of course, this could be mitigated by credits, exemptions and deductions, but that is what has turned the income tax code into the mess it is.
High marginal income tax rates inflict major damage to job creation, as the tax is generally paid out of money that otherwise would have been used to finance capital investment and job creation.
Me: The highest marginal tax rate for the not-so wealthy is the payroll tax which personally I would remove the upper income limit from and then means test Social Security recipients. We could probably lower that tax rate were this done. We all live in this world together and providing a backstop for our elderly should be considered our duty as a so-called Christian nation.
Regulations have substantially increased the costs and risks associated with job creation. Employers are subjected to all sorts of onerous regulations, taxes, and legal liability.
Me: Regulations resulted from the fact that among the human race, there are some who will abuse others in their quest for wealth. Even now there are allegations of foreign "sweatshops" producing goods for American companies looking to maximize their owners equity. I don't think Mr. Schiff doesn't know this, but chooses to pretend capitalism is utopian in order to maximize his own wealth.
In addition, I am moving several asset management jobs from Newport Beach, California to Singapore.
As Congress turns up the heat, more of my capital will continue to be diverted to my foreign companies, creating jobs and tax revenues abroad rather than in the United States.
Me: In the main, Mr. Schiff shows he is more interested in making money than in providing jobs for Americans which is true of most billionaires today. Wealth has superceded service to your fellow man as the scorecard for success. The golden rule says "do unto others as you would have them do unto you were the roles reversed". Mr Schiff has concern only for his own welfare. I expect Satan has a "Singaporean seat in Hell" reserved for him.
When I keep my farm the size I can handle alone, the land I don't buy to get bigger gets farmed by someone else, so I am not entirely selfish, am I?
Communism as it was actually practiced meant a few bigwigs lived like billionaires while everyone else became dependent on them for their welfare and that is what American capitalism is evolving into.
Henry Ford and his wage increase:
"Jan. 5th, 1914, Henry Ford added to his long list of industrial accomplishments when he announced that all worthy Ford Motor Company employees would receive a minimum wage of $5 a day. This was more than double the standard base pay of $2.34.
This announcement resulted in thousands of people descending upon the employment office, hoping to find work at Ford’s automotive plant. Job applications continued to pour in even after all available positions were filled - two months after the announcement, the company was still receiving 500 applications a day.
Ford’s generous pay increase, however, was conditional. It was extended only to employees he considered worthy of the additional money - employees who wouldn’t waste it on gambling, drinking, and other vices, but would use it to secure a happier, healthier lifestyle for themselves and their families.
An employee’s worthiness was determined by the company’s Sociological Department, which interviewed the employees and visited their homes to make sure everything was in good order. If an employee was found lacking, he was given six months to clean up his act. If he failed, he was let go.
The operative word when it came to the wage increase was “he.” Ford chose not to include his female employees in this offer. “I consider women only a temporary factor in industry,” he said. “I pay our women well so they can dress attractively and get married.”"
Notice Henry's offer had strings (regulations) attached.