Obama Is Worst Jobs President Since Great Depression

Believe me i hate Bush almost as much, but Bush's policies fixed the economy after the bubble broke in 2000, Obamas policies are doing the total opposite, once this slush fund (stimulus) runs out the economy is toast.

 

I have said this many times on this site, it would have been incredibly simple to get people back to work in the private sector, and spend 1/10th the dollars per job, or 1/5th if you count on the government having to pay for 2 years.

Why didnt Obama say he would give guided tax breaks to corporations whereby the corporation would generate a tax subsidy for the entire amount they are paying the new employee they hired on as long as it is deemed reasonable, and it would have to be a net increase in jobs, i.e. they can not lay off 1 guy to hire a new guy.

If a corporation hires on a new guy for 40k/year they would recieve a tax subsidy for the amount of the guys wage, this would have put people back to work instantly, and it wouldnt have just created a liberal slush fund where they were blowing money testing cocaine on monkeys. This would have been far more efficient then the stimulus, obviously there would have had to be a bunch more rules to prevent abuse, but it is an easy concept which would have been much more efficient.

Plus the jobs which were created would have eventually been a benefit to the deficit as opposed to government jobs Obama is creating which are a complete detriment to the deficit. Like i said earlier Obama went completely the wrong way.

This would have been an easy fix, but guess i often suffer from the misconception that any bureaucrat wants an easy fix.

 

I think the economy would would have fixed itself but think things would have gotten much worse first if not for Obama

I agree tarp helped and will be paid back,bravo bush for that

Last I read on it less then half of the stimulus was spent.There is no way to count the jobs that were saved due to the stimulus. Numerous state government used stimulus dollars to plug their budgets and avoid layoffs etc.I will judge the stimulus by the overall economy.If Obama gets unemployment to 8-8.5 % unemployment by 2012 I will have considered him and his policies a success

The only tax to business from Obamacare that I am aware of is the tax to employers who dont offer insurance to employees and that doesn't start until 2014 when the recession will probably be over

 

With a trillion dollar deficit and tax rates around half of what they were around Reagan times the Reagan way of cutting taxes in half would not have worked imo

 

Read my above statement, like i said before we need guided tax cuts, we cant just cut taxes and expect that jobs will automatically create themselves, in todays economy, we need to create tax cuts through subsidies for job creation. If you guide tax cuts in the present situation they will work.

I agree that the same things Regan did during his presidency would not work today. But there is no denying it worked for regan during his terms.

Todays economy is different because businesses have never been so fearful, and because of the credit implosion, businesses will continue to hoard cash until someone creates a scenario where they shouldnt, going anti business and creating new taxes does not encourage businesses to spend, this is Obamas mantra.

I agree, straight up cutting taxes will not work, because companies have no incentive at the pr3esent time to spend the cash created by the tax cuts. There is no positive outlook for business, because the guy in the whitehouse demonises them constantly, but if you incentivise job creation tax cuts can, and will work far better then the present scenario of creating government jobs.

 

I agree with both your statements,but thats not the plan or the message the republicans are sending imo

I agree Reagan did a great job,so did Bush Sr imo.I'd vote for them over Obama

 

I also agree that the republicans are fucked right now, its a damned if you do damned if you dont scenario. Hence my basil marceaux alvin greene thread.

Trust me like i said before my hatred is almost bipartisan, i just hate the idea of INCREASING tax on business more cause this will inevitably lead to layoffs, while i agree that tax cuts probably wont lead to jobs by themselves, i feel 100% that tax increases will costs tons of jobs, there is no way around that scenario, i guess Obama could do what i said in inverse and say he wouldnt increase tax if companies hire new people on, but the direction the dems are currently taking is destructive to the economy.

It isnt a matter of whether the dems plan of raising taxes will help or hurt, it is guaranteed destruction, tax increases on businesses during recessions do not work.... period.

 

With all the mis information out there its hard for me to tell where Obama is really raising taxes.I know he will let the bush tax cuts for the top expire.I know businesses will pay a tax for not offering health insurance.I know he plans to raise taxes tor those above 250,000 but not how much.beyond that I really dont know for sure what other taxes he is raising

I agree taxes should not be raised now,but in a year or 2 taxes at Clinton levels are ok imo.

I agree with tax cuts for business in the right way as you suggested,not just tax cut, tax cuts,tax cuts that all Republicans keep repeating today

With Obama I am taking a wait and see approach.I am not an Obama maniac but think the hypocricy, lies and misinformation spread about him is wrong

Obama is like Bush Jr in may ways.He is drawing down in Iraq,but putting more in Afghanistan. Overall he still has close to the same number of troops in those 2 countries.

Obama continued the trend of bail outs and massive spending started by Bush.His healthcare plan is a plan first started by a top GOP presidential contender.Obama is still implementing most of Bush homeland security policies


I voted for Obama in 08.If unemployment is at 8-8.5 % in 2012 and no more then 50,000 troops each in Afghanistan and Iraq he probably gets my vote again.The bar is set pretty low due to lack of Republican opposition.

Mitt Romney has a very good chance of getting my vote and if he is the nominee I'll probably make my final decision in the poll booth.If unemployment is over 8.5 or obama still has to many troops overseas I vote third party.There are a few GOP candidates I like.

I love Ryan but I doubt he runs in 2012. I like Gary Johnson and Chuck Hagel but I doubt they would get the nomination.I'd vote for Chris Christy but I doubt he runs in 2012.

If Hucakbee,Palenty,Barber,Jindal,newt etc got the nomination and Obama fails one of my objectives I vote third party

If Sarah Palin is the GOP nominee I vote Obama no matter what

 

Here they are...a simple well-defined list of all the Obama tax increases that will hit everyone of you, your families, your employer and yes your death...Obama brings back death taxes.

Enjoy:


July 1, 2010 | Americans for Tax Reform

Six Months to Go Until
The Largest Tax Hikes in History

In just six months, the largest tax hikes in the history of America will take effect.
They will hit families and small businesses in three great waves beginning on January 1, 2011:

First Wave:
Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief
In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. These will all expire on January 1, 2011:

Personal income tax rates will rise. The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:
- The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
- The 25% bracket rises to 28%
- The 28% bracket rises to 31%
- The 33% bracket rises to 36%
- The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut.

The return of the Death Tax. This year, there is no death tax. For those dying on or after January 1 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.

Higher tax rates on savers and investors. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011. The dividends tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.

Second Wave:
Obamacare
There are over twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare. Several will first go into effect on January 1, 2011. They include:

The “Medicine Cabinet Tax” Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).

The “Special Needs Kids Tax” This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal government limit). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars cannot be used to pay for this type of special needs education.

The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike. This provision of Obamacare increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Third Wave:
The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes
When Americans prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2011, they’ll be in for a nasty surprise—the AMT won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief provisions will have expired. The major items include:

The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up from 4 million last year. According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center, Congress’ failure to index the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 28.5 million. These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers.

Small business expensing will be slashed and 50% expensing will disappear. Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or “depreciate”) equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way down to $25,000. Larger businesses can expense half of their purchases of equipment. In January of 2011, all of it will have to be “depreciated.”

Taxes will be raised on all types of businesses. There are literally scores of tax hikes on business that will take place. The biggest is the loss of the “research and experimentation tax credit,” but there are many, many others. Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax relief will cost jobs.

Tax Benefits for Education and Teaching Reduced. The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses. Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut.
Employer-provided educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.

Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer allowed. Under current law, a retired person with an IRA can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly to a charity from their IRA. This contribution also counts toward an annual “required minimum distribution.” This ability will no longer be there."

 

Caterpillar, Inc. says Obamacare would cost them $100 million in first year
By: J.P. Freire
Associate Commentary Editor
03/19/10 11:39 AM EDT

FILE - In this April 16, 2008 file photo, Caterpillar heavy machinery for sale is lined up at Milton Cat in Richmond, Vt..(AP Photo/Toby Talbot, file)
Obamacare will take a huge chunk out of the American economy, so says Caterpillar, Inc., which said in a letter to House leadership that the bill under consideration would increase the company's health care costs by more than $100 million in the first year alone:

In a letter Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, Caterpillar urged lawmakers to vote against the plan "because of the substantial cost burdens it would place on our shareholders, employees and retirees."

Caterpillar, the world's largest construction machinery manufacturer by sales, said it's particularly opposed to provisions in the bill that would expand Medicare taxes and mandate insurance coverage. The legislation would require nearly all companies to provide health insurance for their employees or face large fines.

One of the biggest arguments for Obamacare is that businesses are weighed down by current costs -- the bill is said to allow these businesses to invest their money more efficiently. Apparently that's not the case here.

The Peoria-based company is one of many hard-hit employers in Illinois, which has an unemployment rate of 12.2 percent. It's delusional to think that adding $100 million to their operating costs won't make it more difficult to hire. In fact, this is exactly what 130 economists said in their letter to President Obama yesterday saying that the bill was unquestionably a job killer.

This isn't the first time Caterpillar has had to force Obama to face the facts. At an event held with CEO Jim Owens in February 2009, Obama claimed that the stimulus would allow Caterpillar "to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off." (The company had just laid off 22,000 people.) Once the president left the event, however, Owens was asked if the stimulus package would be able to stop the 22,000 layoffs. His reply: "I think realistically no. The truth is we're going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again."


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...-them-100-million-in-first-year-88562012.html