The Real Problem!!!

[joshuacox]

Here is grade A. Number 1. A+ proof that neither the Dems or the GOP care at all about the economy, deficit, or the middle class.

First the Dems....Raise Taxes on the rich!!! Guess what just cause they raise taxes on the rich WILL NOT help the economy. It will only hurt it, because The CEO's and business owners won't take a pay cut. They'll just cut employee pay or benefits, maybe raise prices.


The GOP... Cut Taxes and "entitlements".....Never mind that we've paid into those programs for years. Isn't an insurance company supposed to still honor the policy even if they might lose money on you? Hasn't an agreement, that i have been paying for for years, already been made?

Honestly i find the Dems the lesser of 2 evils, but still neither side is addressing the real issue at all.


The real issue is the fact that minimum wage is at 7.25 and hour when it takes 13.50 to support yourself. We are in the most civilized country in the world and its legal to work someone for a full time job and only pay them half of what it takes to support themselves. This has far reaching economic consequences. If all the people working full time jobs made $14 an hour how many would we still have to pay welfare and food stamps for? How many would still qualify for medicaide? How many parents give a large part of there salary to helping there adult kids pay bills?

If The minimum wage was doubled the lower and middle classes would have the disposable income to spend more. Which means more products must be made. Which means more jobs making and selling said products.

This is the real issue the fact that middle class salaries have been stagnant since 1970 while corperate profits and worker production has sky rocketed. Thats right we're working harder but making less. In the 70's it was unheard of to work a full time job and not being able to pay rent and this was a time when most house holds were single earners!!!

 

[Jake255]

I see what you're saying, but by doubling minimum wage means companies won't hire as many employees simply because they won't be able to afford it. There are many companies who employ just a few people, they may end up firing all their employees or just retaining one or two if they had to double people's wages.

 

[mandyangel]

I just want the government to butt out of the economy, we have tried that for 4 years and things have only gotten worse. But it looks like we get treated to 4 MORE years of that. My dad isn't hiring a single person.

 

[joshuacox]

Bill O'rielly has this plan where you subsidize the extra money businesses would put out thru the tax code, even if in some cases the government would pay out. His theory is that the Gov. would come out on top in the money dept.

A. they would make more from the income taxes off the employees

B. The amount of money saved due to people who now make too much money to qualify for welfare programs.

C. From the economic growth of the consumer class having more disposable income.


This is rewarding work as the right always says.

 

[joshuacox]

I just want the government to butt out of the economy, we have tried that for 4 years and things have only gotten worse. But it looks like we get treated to 4 MORE years of that. My dad isn't hiring a single person.

Lol things haven't gotten worse. Even the Gop admitted the economy was better then Obama got it. There argument was that they could fix it faster.
I guess expecting us to forget it was bush who crashed it in the first place.


I would really like to see the actual amount of the debt that obama is responsible for. The 2 wars and the first financial/housing bail out ( obama signed it, but it was bushs baby) are on him as well as medicare part D. While the troop surge and the auto bail out is on obama. My guess is that its lower then the GOP wants to admit and higher then the dems wanna admit. LOL

 

[mandyangel]

Lol things haven't gotten worse. Even the Gop admitted the economy was better then Obama got it. There argument was that they could fix it faster.
I guess expecting us to forget it was bush who crashed it in the first place.


I would really like to see the actual amount of the debt that obama is responsible for. The 2 wars and the first financial/housing bail out ( obama signed it, but it was bushs baby) are on him as well as medicare part D. While the troop surge and the auto bail out is on obama. My guess is that its lower then the GOP wants to admit and higher then the dems wanna admit. LOL

How long are you gonna blame Bush for? Its amazing, this guy has been President for FOUR YEARS and your still blaming everything on Bush. How did Obama's health care law create jobs? Have you heard about the businesses now reducing everybody from full time to PART time so they don't have to meet the # for paying for their workers health care? WHY has Obama jumped back and forth so many times on taxes? WHY does my dad not know what the next year is going to be like, he doesn't even know what his tax rate will be! Make it whatever I guess, but at least TELL US! But I'm sorry, I guess I'm wrong and this is all just Bush's fault.

 

[joshuacox]

How long are you gonna blame Bush for? Its amazing, this guy has been President for FOUR YEARS and your still blaming everything on Bush. How did Obama's health care law create jobs? Have you heard about the businesses now reducing everybody from full time to PART time so they don't have to meet the # for paying for their workers health care? WHY has Obama jumped back and forth so many times on taxes? WHY does my dad not know what the next year is going to be like, he doesn't even know what his tax rate will be! Make it whatever I guess, but at least TELL US! But I'm sorry, I guess I'm wrong and this is all just Bush's fault.

No matter how long anyone is president the things that are your fault are still your fault. I don't doubt obama has spent alot of money ... trillions. But what chunk of the deficit are his policies responsible for. You might think holding bush accountable for his policies is blaming him, but i just would like to know the honest score. You haven't seen either side put out that stat........From fox,drudge and such he's responsible for it all... The wars the financial collapse, all of it. From the white house its all "he was left with a mess". Obama extended food stamps and unemployment benefits. That goes on his score board...... Get what i mean???

 

[Billnew]

Well, dang,
Why not make everyone recieve a million dollar salary, then everyone will be able to afford everything.

You forget, you have to make enough money in profit to pay people the minimum wage, and when everyone makes a million the cost for a cup of coffee would probably be $1000.

Neither side really cares or talking meaningful changes.
tax increase: 2trillion over 10 yrs, last 4 years saw 6 t in new debt. So we reduce the rate at which we borrow.
Spending cuts: reduce the growth of goverment with no cuts, will not reduce the deficiet. What is the best they could hope for? 500billion over 10 yrs?

First off, no politician is assured they will be in service in 10 yrs, so they can't fight for anything past thier current term. No president will be in power in 10, so what do they care, they show that in 7-10yrs their plan would show reduction, but never develops that way, because of ignored costs and overruns.

 

[JCSr]

How long are you gonna blame Bush for? Its amazing, this guy has been President for FOUR YEARS and your still blaming everything on Bush. How did Obama's health care law create jobs? Have you heard about the businesses now reducing everybody from full time to PART time so they don't have to meet the # for paying for their workers health care? WHY has Obama jumped back and forth so many times on taxes? WHY does my dad not know what the next year is going to be like, he doesn't even know what his tax rate will be! Make it whatever I guess, but at least TELL US! But I'm sorry, I guess I'm wrong and this is all just Bush's fault.

Shouldn't you also be blaming Bush considering he ran the government and did quite of butting in when it came to the economy? Why did you only go back 4 years and ignored Bush's eight years?

 

[DaisyDay]

I just want the government to butt out of the economy, we have tried that for 4 years and things have only gotten worse. But it looks like we get treated to 4 MORE years of that.

You don't know what you're talking about. Four years ago, we were near the bottom of the worst recession since the Great Depression; we have been in recovery for two years.

My dad isn't hiring a single person.

Other dads (and moms and childless people) are. Perhaps yours simply doesn't need more help.

 

[Pepperoni]

... Cut Taxes and "entitlements".....Never mind that we've paid into those programs for years. Isn't an insurance company supposed to still honor the policy even if they might lose money on you? Hasn't an agreement, that i have been paying for for years, already been made?

I assume you're referring to Social Security. The truth is no one "pays in" to Social Security. It is a tax (it was ruled as such by the Supreme Court back in the '30s) NOT an insurance program or investment program; and as such, no returns are guaranteed.

 

[joshuacox]

I assume you're referring to Social Security. The truth is no one "pays in" to Social Security. It is a tax (it was ruled as such by the Supreme Court back in the '30s) NOT an insurance program or investment program; and as such, no returns are guaranteed.

whether they call it a tax or a policy. Anywhere else in the market place it would be a valid contract that if violated you could sue for compensation.
I'm also pretty sure they take money from me fore medi care as well.

 

[Jake255]

Obama did spend more money in office than Bush did, the national debt was something like 5.5 trillion dollars from Washingto to Clinton, now it's 15.5 trillion.

National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

 

[joshuacox]

Obama did spend more money in office than Bush did, the national debt was something like 5.5 trillion dollars from Washingto to Clinton, now it's 15.5 trillion.

National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

but some portion of that were from bush's policies!!!! You can't blame him for the cost of the wars or the financial bail-out and those are part of the 6 trillion more in debt that occurred during the last 4 years.


Now the troop surge in afagnistan is on obamas tab as well as...
Any increase in the eligibility of food stamps
The auto bail out
stimulus bill
exct.

has anyone ever seen the actual break down????

My guess is that he spent less then bush, but more then any other pres. besides him. A fact neither side wanted to publicize.

 

[Jake255]

but some portion of that were from bush's policies!!!! You can't blame him for the cost of the wars or the financial bail-out and those are part of the 6 trillion more in debt that occurred during the last 4 years.


Now the troop surge in afagnistan is on obamas tab as well as...
Any increase in the eligibility of food stamps
The auto bail out
stimulus bill
exct.

has anyone ever seen the actual break down????

My guess is that he spent less then bush, but more then any other pres. besides him. A fact neither side wanted to publicize.

I wasn't saying Bush isn't at fault, if you re-read what I wrote from Washington to Clinton the deficit was 5.5 trillion, Bush and Obama have brought it up to 15.5 trillion. Bush spent something like 4.3 trillion and Obama has spent close to 5 trillion.

Obama is not blameless in this. When he took office there were 23 million people on gov't assistance programs, now there are 47 million. He needs to pave the way for small businesses to grow and prosper, but small businesses are not hiring with him in office because they would go under. They are not hiring and now they will not hire f/t employees because of healthcare.

These are real issues and real reasons, all you need to do is research the facts - don't listen to CNN or FOX news, those are opinions.

The article I posted gives the amount Bush and Obama spent. You have to remember - Bush was in office for 8 years and spent like 4.3 - Obama was in office for only 4 years and spent more than Bush did in his 8 years.

 

[Jake255]

 

[DaisyDay]

Yeah, but Obama was not responsible for the 2009 budget. It was already in place when he took office. It was put in place by Bush and the 110th Congress.

 

[Jake255]

Yeah, but Obama was not responsible for the 2009 budget. It was already in place when he took office. It was put in place by Bush and the 110th Congress.

I'm not defending one or the other, Bush's spending was out of control and now Obama's is out of control - it'll be 20 trillion dollars by the time he leaves office unless something is done now. Obama was elected to fix the problem, not add to it.

 

[joshuacox]

I wasn't saying Bush isn't at fault, if you re-read what I wrote from Washington to Clinton the deficit was 5.5 trillion, Bush and Obama have brought it up to 15.5 trillion. Bush spent something like 4.3 trillion and Obama has spent close to 5 trillion.

Obama is not blameless in this. When he took office there were 23 million people on gov't assistance programs, now there are 47 million. He needs to pave the way for small businesses to grow and prosper, but small businesses are not hiring with him in office because they would go under. They are not hiring and now they will not hire f/t employees because of healthcare.

These are real issues and real reasons, all you need to do is research the facts - don't listen to CNN or FOX news, those are opinions.

The article I posted gives the amount Bush and Obama spent. You have to remember - Bush was in office for 8 years and spent like 4.3 - Obama was in office for only 4 years and spent more than Bush did in his 8 years.

but if those extra people on unemployment and such are those that have fallen into poverty, not the eligibility requirements being lowered. THen its a good thing we have a safety net or the economic crash could have triggered another depression. It all rolls down hill. If you lose your job and theres no unemployment. You use up your parents/families disposable income. So they as well as you are able to buy less. creating a vicious circle.

That is the total amount the government spent. You can't hold Obama responsible for the money spent in Iraq during his term. You can't count the financial bail out against him either, bush worked the deal it just fell to the new pres. to sign it. Then theres the money lost to the medicare part D that we are still paying for ( that's where the government can't negotiate the price with pharmaceutical companies). All of these things would have counted against the debt after bush left office. Call me crazy, but these things were the major driver of the debt. I would just like to see the real math.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I see what you're saying, but by doubling minimum wage means companies won't hire as many employees simply because they won't be able to afford it. There are many companies who employ just a few people, they may end up firing all their employees or just retaining one or two if they had to double people's wages.

Raising the minimum wage is a horrible idea for a couple of reasons.

1) It causes price increases (if a business costs more to operate, the increased get passed along to the customers)

2) Not all jobs are worth 13/hour. If a 14 year old can do your job, you can't expect big bucks.

3) It screws over people who've worked for 3-4 years to make an increased wage and creates a new realm of "new poor".

If you have a person who's worked for 5 years to make $16/hour and has set their budget accordingly, and then they raised the minimum wage to $16/hour, that person just got sent back to square one, and when market prices adjust to the minimum wage increase, that person essentially just got a pay decrease.

Minimum wage increases help the lower class in the short term, but in the long term, it leaves the lower class right back where they were before, and takes a segment of the middle class and moves them down to the lower class.

Also, the lion's share of people making minimum wage are teenagers (verified with BLS), making such a drastic move for a demographic where only 4% live on their own has some negative impacts. In terms of teenagers (and places that employ them), if you raise the minimum wage, the bosses are likely going to opt for downsizing their staff before they raise prices.

So, for the minimum wage jobs, the ones that employ full time adults are going to raise their prices, and the ones that employ part time teenagers are going to fire some of their staff.

It's just a bad situation all around.