Posible new "boon" to the economy? Higher minimum wages??.....PSM
Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-03-01
In Reply to:
I was just thinking, we did a lot of discussion yesterday about welfare reform, the bloated welfare roles that we have now, and how to end it. How about passing a DECENT, HONEST, REALISTIC minimum wage act that is based on the present economy, the proposed future economay, and will make it more profitable for an American to get a fair-paying job on which he can feed his family, pay his REASONABLE mortgage, pay his bills, etc., instead of having the minimum wage so low that it is actually more profitable for many families to say on welfare, medicaide, and food stamps, along with subsidised housing AND NOT have to juggle three low-paying jobs to do it? Don't you think that if American workers felt they were more faily paid, were being compensated fairly for their efforts, and would bring home enough wages each week to live within comfortable means, that more and more folk would jump off the roles and into a job (of course, we first need the part of the stimulus package to address keeping our companies solvent and employing). Just a thought!!! 
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
A day's wages for a day's food.......... sm
Ring any bells?
If we were being paid bloated wages, maybe, but
if they want to go any lower than they already have gone (I had a truly insulting offer a few weeks back of 0.0625 cpl with 30 years experience), I say let India have it. MTSOs need to be going in the opposite direction and MTs might want to look into unionization themselves. Peronally, I think we are also worth $28/hr and do not consider that to be an exorbitant for MTs or for auto workers, given the COL. JMHO.
Why not? The basic minimum that should be required. nm
.
No, my wages and retirement have only gone down last two years of
Wrong! He gets away with paying cheaper wages
Joe is looking out for Joe, not Bob, Bill, and Brad who are looking for a "good job." Joe will help Joe if he's making that much, believe you me!
she said her experience was w/ minimum wage workers
she said it herself what they were paid - minimum wage -duh
I refer to minimum wage workers because...
This type of work normally paid minimum wage. I, however, did not...
Very true. Can anyone imagine living on minimum...sm
wage and being made to feel you are not valued, never mind paying your bills. There are a LOT of working poor out there that do not look for a handout and struggle every day to be good parents. It is unbelievable to me that so many people think that the poor are all lazy and worthless. I am sure the sterotype makes the rich able to justify not paying a little more to those lazy ignorant people that just need to pull themselves up by their boot straps while I have a house for every month of the year and a yacht and never have to worry about if my light or heating bill is paid or if I have enough money to buy food for my kids. Don't get me started.
Please comment on the OP...about minimum wage workers
x
Okay then don't complain because offshoring has lowered your MT wages. n/m
GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage Increase...sm
GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage Increase
Republican-controlled Senate derails proposed election-year increase in minimum wage
WASHINGTON, Jun. 22, 2006
By DAVID ESPO AP Special Correspondent
(AP)
(AP) The Republican-controlled Senate smothered a proposed election-year increase in the minimum wage Wednesday, rejecting Democratic claims that it was past time to boost the $5.15 hourly pay floor that has been in effect for nearly a decade.
The 52-46 vote was eight short of the 60 needed for approval under budget rules and came one day after House Republican leaders made clear they do not intend to allow a vote on the issue, fearing it might pass.
The Senate vote marked the ninth time since 1997 that Democrats there have proposed _ and Republicans have blocked _ a stand-alone increase in the minimum wage. The debate fell along predictable lines.
Americans believe that no one who works hard for a living should have to live in poverty. A job should lift you out of poverty, not keep you in it, said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. He said a worker paid $5.15 an hour would earn $10,700 a year, almost $6,000 below the poverty line for a family of three.
Kennedy also said lawmakers' annual pay has risen by roughly $30,000 since the last increase in the minimum wage.
Republicans said a minimum wage increase would wind up hurting the low-wage workers that Democrats said they want to help.
For every increase you make in the minimum wage, you will cost some of them their jobs, said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.
He described the clash as a classic debate between two very different philosophies. One philosophy that believes in the marketplace, the competitive system ... and entrepreneurship. And secondly is the argument that says the government knows better and that topdown mandates work.
The measure drew the support of 43 Democrats, eight Republicans and one independent. Four of those eight Republicans are seeking re-election in the fall.
Democrats had conceded in advance that this attempt to raise the minimum wage would fare no better than their previous attempts. At the same time, they have made clear in recent days they hope to gain support in the coming midterm elections by stressing the issue. Organized labor supports the legislation, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said that contrary to some impressions, most minimum wage workers are adults, not teenagers, and many of them are women.
When the Democrats control the Senate, one of the first pieces of legislation we'll see is an increase in the minimum wage, said Kennedy.
His proposal would have increased the minimum wage to $5.85 beginning 60 days after the legislation was enacted; to $6.55 one year later; and to $7.25 a year after that. He said inflation has eroded the value of the current $5.15 minimum wage by 20 percent.
With the help of a few rebellious Republicans, House Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee succeeded in attaching a minimum wage increase last week to legislation providing funding for federal social programs. Fearing that the House would pass the measure with the increase intact, the GOP leadership swiftly decided to sidetrack the entire bill.
I am opposed to it, and I think a vast majority of our (rank and file) is opposed to it, House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday.
Pressed by reporters, he said, There are limits to my willingness to just throw anything out on the floor.
On Wednesday, his spokesman, Kevin Madden, said Boehner has told fellow Republicans the House will have to deal with this some way. He said no decisions had been made.
While Democrats depend on organized labor to win elections, Republicans are closely aligned with business interests that oppose any increase in the federal wage floor or would like changes in the current system.
Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, offered an alternative that proposed a minimum wage increase of $1.10 over 18 months, in two steps.
The increase was coupled with a variety of provisions offering regulatory or tax relief to small businesses, including one to exempt enterprises with less than $1 million in annual receipts from the federal wage and hour law entirely. The current exemption level is $500,000, and a Republican document noted the amount had lagged behind inflation.
Additionally, Republicans proposed a system of optional flextime for workers, a step that Enzi said would allow employees, at their discretion, to work more than 40 hours one week in exchange for more time off the next. Unions generally oppose such initiatives, and the Republican plan drew 45 votes, with 53 in opposition.
MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
So we offer substandard wages and attract more people to welfare???...sm
More of your tax dollars are being spent there than at McDonalds or whatever, if we do not get more people working, we also have LESS people paying into the tax system, both federal and state, which subsidises OTHER necessitites. And people complain about the immigrant workers taking jobs? Because of substandard wages and the increased benefit of being on Welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, and Medicaide, it seems only immigrants WANT to do these insultingly low-paying jobs. I am talking about a wage where a family can be together, both parents are not working two jobs, and thus not taking care of the kids, another social problem, and employed taxpayers are also CONSUMERS who drive the economy, but if you are not making a living wage, you cannot participate in the economy. How is this wrong?
My guess is much higher.
I would say at least 100; 25 who can read, another 25 who can comprehend what they read; another 25 to articulate what the ones with reading comprehension can understand and try to express, and another 25 to type and proof, at least.
So much for no higher taxes of
any kind for 95% of the American people. This is just going to kill the people who are already struggling to make ends meet. Not to mention the high prices that will come if they get cap and trade passed. Why don't people in Washington get this? All they talk about are the sacrifices that we are all going to have to make and they do nothing but keep spending. Where is the sacrifice on their end, huh? We need to fix this economy and stop the constant spending by our government.
I'm so sick and tired of this. I work to make money and they are just going to take more and more of what I earn. I've always been responsible with my money and have excellent credit but how I am going to continue to make ends meet if this keeps up? It is pretty sad when responsible people are scared this will bring them down as well. I guess the rich will just have to pay for everything because there won't be a middle class left the rate things are going.
Sigh. They pay a higher percentage because they
thousands of times more wealth than each average Joe (and I DO NOT mean the plumber). We have a progressive tax system here, American as apple pie, and Obama only wants to adjust the rate back to where it was were 8 years ago....no socialist subversion in that. We all managed to survive the economic boom of the 90s, after all.
Furthermore, before pronoucing any judgements on this issue, check out the disparities in the (here comes that CAPITALIST phrase again) distibution of wealth in the US. If you do not want to research this yourself, just say so and I will post that information for the UMPTEENTH time.
Now, before you go off, Wikipedia is not the Communist Manifesto. Go to the link and scroll down a little better than halfway and read the section on the United States. If you are in the middle class, the information there will make your blood boil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
it's a lot higher percentage than McCain's - nm
x
too many people = higher premiums?!
Wow, not that I want to spend all week talking about insurance, but I'm really amazed by things I'm hearing. The whole point of insurance is to lower your individual cost by adding in lots and lots of people. If you and I are the only ones who have insurance, and you have a heart attack, I'm effectively paying half your bill, right? But if we could average that bill over millions and millions of people, it'd be much easier to bear.
The ideal situation, then, would be for everybody in the country to have insurance, so we could average the costs over 300 million people. (This would also lead to a better ability to negotiate drug prices, and encourage hospitals not to spend millions on useless equipment like surgical robots that drive the costs skyward.)
Read Obama's plan, or Baucus', or Kennedy's, or Wyden's, and you'll find that people who can't afford even those new low premiums, are helped out with subsidies, NOT FINED. It's far, far cheaper to help subsidize poor people's premiums, than it is to have them show up to the ER for every cold and flu symptom, you know? Not to mention that they'll then be able to get preventative care, and not so many of them will wind up with horribly costly illnesses down the road, diabetes, heart disease, etc.
Affordable health care isn't just an easy fix, it's a moral one. And it has been tried a million times--I think Truman was actually the first president to suggest it. But you and I don't have the kind of lobbying money that big pharma has, that the doctors have, that every other player has, and they have worked for *decades* to keep Americans from getting the healthcare system they deserve.
you think only 3 have been tortured, I think the number is much higher....sm
That might be the reason that the former administration wanted to keep them forever imprisoned, so that they cannot talk!
Higher taxes are not my interest, neither is giving.
@
Anywhere in Scandinavia. Higher standard of living.
So you think you're exempt from higher taxes?
nm
yeah, of higher taxes for all -kind of change we can
nm
JTBB - If you find a higher-level forum where
intellect is respected and informed debate is possible, please post that info a time or 2. I'm looking for a spot like that myself and this sure ain't it.
Combined income or small business making 120,000 or higher
will be taxed big time instead of the 250,000. It could down lower to where anyone making 42,000 or higher will be taxed big time. He keeps changing his mind, but we will for sure see if he wins.
Here's another one regarding the economy.
And you're right. Some people do. 
|
Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.
Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?
Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.
I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special - in fact, a bit subpar - during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.
But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.
Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.
It should have been a good year for American families: the economy grew 4.2 percent, its best performance since 1999. Yet most families actually lost economic ground. Real median household income - the income of households in the middle of the income distribution, adjusted for inflation - fell for the fifth year in a row. And one key source of economic insecurity got worse, as the number of Americans without health insurance continued to rise.
We don't have comparable data for 2005 yet, but it's pretty clear that the results will be similar. G.D.P. growth has remained solid, but most families are probably losing ground as their earnings fail to keep up with inflation.
Behind the disconnect between economic growth and family incomes lies the extremely lopsided nature of the economic recovery that officially began in late 2001. The growth in corporate profits has, as I said, been spectacular. Even after adjusting for inflation, profits have risen more than 50 percent since the last quarter of 2001. But real wage and salary income is up less than 7 percent.
There are some wealthy Americans who derive a large share of their income from dividends and capital gains on stocks, and therefore benefit more or less directly from soaring profits. But these people constitute a small minority. For everyone else the sluggish growth in wages is the real story. And much of the wage and salary growth that did take place happened at the high end, in the form of rising payments to executives and other elite employees. Average hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, are lower now than when the recovery began.
So there you have it. Americans don't feel good about the economy because it hasn't been good for them. Never mind the G.D.P. numbers: most people are falling behind.
It's much harder to explain why. The disconnect between G.D.P. growth and the economic fortunes of most American families can't be dismissed as a normal occurrence. Wages and median family income often lag behind profits in the early stages of an economic expansion, but not this far behind, and not for so long. Nor, I should say, is there any easy way to place more than a small fraction of the blame on Bush administration policies. At this point the joylessness of the economic expansion for most Americans is a mystery.
What's clear, however, is that advisers who believe that Mr. Bush can repair his political standing by making speeches telling the public how well the economy is doing have misunderstood the situation. The problem isn't that people don't understand how good things are. It's that they know, from personal experience, that things really aren't that good. |
The economy. It's not going anywhere
counting.
Economy going down is right.
work for, the largest transcription company in the US, is now paying us for ASR, 60% and others will get straight 4 cents a line.
Actually, no, not the economy....(sm)
I was actually referring to Pelosi and her power grab, cutting off all GOP opposition, behind closed doors, that no one will ever hear about again, from the other day.
And did you catch Barney Frank today on the retroactive rules on the TARP?
http://www.newsmax.com/politics/tarp/2009/01/09/169663.html?utm_medium=RSS
What I am doing to help the economy
1. I pray for this country and the president every day.
2. I'm not constantly complaining about everything.
3. I am not watching the DOW like it's American Idol.
4. I’ve taken fiscal responsibility for me and my home.
5. I give what I can to the food banks and my church etc. to help those who need help.
I did not vote for President Obama. I do not think he is the messiah and I certainly will not blame him for the mess we are in right now simply because we all played a part. No one forced anyone to take house loans that they could not pay, no one forces us to use our credit card and run up debts and live beyond our means, no one predicted that you would take a loan and then lose your job and be in foreclosure and no one regulated the banks like they should of.
Now that being said, in a crisis it is so easy to look for someone to blame, become angry, and forget who we are. So my advice the next time you are at your kitchen table wondering how you are going to make ends meet, that you remember who you are, an American. I would also advise getting some debt management help.
So please, instead of running around with your hands up in the air thinking the worst and claiming the sky is falling, try listening to the Star Spangled Banner or something that is positive. I have found that this helps me a lot.
Now let us all take a good long look in the mirror, have a little faith in ourselves as a country and stop beating up on each other. Have a good day everyone and God Bless America.
What I am doing to help the economy
1. I pray for this country and the president every day.
2. I'm not constantly complaining about everything.
3. I am not watching the DOW like it's American Idol.
4. I’ve taken fiscal responsibility for me and my home.
5. I give what I can to the food banks and my church etc. to help those who need help.
I did not vote for President Obama. I do not think he is the messiah and I certainly will not blame him for the mess we are in right now simply because we all played a part. No one forced anyone to take house loans that they could not pay, no one forces us to use our credit card and run up debts and live beyond our means, no one predicted that you would take a loan and then lose your job and be in foreclosure and no one regulated the banks like they should of.
Now that being said, in a crisis it is so easy to look for someone to blame, become angry, and forget who we are. So my advice the next time you are at your kitchen table wondering how you are going to make ends meet, that you remember who you are, an American. I would also advise getting some debt management help.
So please, instead of running around with your hands up in the air thinking the worst and claiming the sky is falling, try listening to the Star Spangled Banner or something that is positive. I have found that this helps me a lot.
Now let us all take a good long look in the mirror, have a little faith in ourselves as a country and stop beating up on each other. Have a good day everyone and God Bless America.
Please take Economy 101
Your pathetic little woe-is-me mentality is the problem with the economy.
Wake up, eejit. The 'rich' people are the ones paying all the taxes. The runts at the bottom - you know - the ones so unintelligent or unmotivated to make it in the world - pay no taxes and suck all the money out of the country.
No country ever got anywhere by taking down the successful people and raising up the ingrates. In America, you can get rich if you want to. But you have to work for it. If you don't have the guts or the self-motivation, you get to live according to your own means.
Suck it up.
The Economy
The Economy - Not the President - is Tanking the Market
by: Hale Stewart
One of the more ridiculous statements going around over the last few weeks is "this is an Obama bear market." This statement is, well, ill-informed at best and fraudulent at worst. Let's look at why.
First -- who is saying this? Such economic luminaries as John Hawkins at Right Wing News (who actually asked Is Obama Deliberately Tanking the Stock Market?), Powerline, Brit Hume along with a host of other right wing bloggers. What all of these people have in common is their incessant chearleading during the Bush years despite mounting evidence of an upcoming recession. There are the same people who argued that ... housing is a small part of the economy ... most people are paying their mortgages ... the US economy will decouple from the rest of the world .... it's the greatest story never told ..... you get the idea. Simply put, these are people who have distinguished themselves by being some of the best contrary indicators around.
Secondly, the SPYs -- the tracking ETF for the S&P 500 -- dropped from (roughly) 155 in the summer of 2007 to (roughly) 85 at the end of last year. Yet I don't remember any of them saying that was the Bush bear market -- even though that's a drop of roughly 43%. No -- it's the new President that's causing the problems. In addition, when Bush took office the SPYs dropped from roughly 130 at the begging of 2001 to 85 in the fourth quarter of 2002. Yet somehow I don't think any of them blamed Bush's policies for the drop. Then it was the "lasting effects of the Clinton recession" or something similar.
What all of these idiots are forgetting is the simple fact that the economy is the backdrop of the stock market. When the economy does well the stock market does well. When the economy doesn't do well, the stock market doesn't do well. And to that end, the economy isn't doing well right now. Let's look at some recent news events.
From the BEA:
Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and propertylocated in the United States -- decreased at an annual rate of 6.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008,(that is, from the third quarter to the fourth quarter), according to preliminary estimates released by theBureau of Economic Analysis. In the third quarter, real GDP decreased 0.5 percent.
From the BLS:
Nonfarm payroll employment continued to fall sharply in February (-651,000), and the unemployment rate rose from 7.6 to 8.1 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Payroll employment has declined by 2.6 million in the past 4 months. In February, job losses were large and widespread across nearly all major industry sectors.
From the Federal Reserve:
Reports from the twelve Federal Reserve Districts suggest that national economic conditions deteriorated further during the reporting period of January through late February. Ten of the twelve reports indicated weaker conditions or declines in economic activity; the exceptions were Philadelphia and Chicago, which reported that their regional economies "remained weak." The deterioration was broad based, with only a few sectors such as basic food production and pharmaceuticals appearing to be exceptions. Looking ahead, contacts from various Districts rate the prospects for near-term improvement in economic conditions as poor, with a significant pickup not expected before late 2009 or early 2010.
Consumer spending remained sluggish on net, although many Districts noted some improvement in January and February compared with a dismal holiday spending season. Travel and tourist activity fell noticeably in key destinations, as did activity for a wide range of nonfinancial services, with substantial job cuts noted in many instances. Reports on manufacturing activity suggested steep declines in activity in some sectors and pronounced declines overall. Conditions weakened somewhat for agricultural producers and substantially for extractors of natural resources, with reduced global demand cited as an underlying determinant in both cases. Markets for residential real estate remained largely stagnant, with only minimal and scattered signs of stabilization emerging in some areas, while demand for commercial real estate weakened significantly. Reports from banks and other financial institutions indicated further drops in business loan demand, a slight deterioration in credit quality for businesses and households, and continued tight credit availability.
From the FDIC:
Expenses associated with rising loan losses and declining asset values overwhelmed revenues in the fourth quarter of 2008, producing a net loss of $26.2 billion at insured commercial banks and savings institutions. This is the first time since the fourth quarter of 1990 that the industry has posted an aggregate net loss for a quarter. The ?0.77 percent quarterly return on assets (ROA) is the worst since the ?1.10 percent in the second quarter of 1987. A year ago, the industry reported $575 million in profits and an ROA of 0.02 percent. High expenses for loan-loss provisions, sizable losses in trading accounts, and large writedowns of goodwill and other assets all contributed to the industry's net loss. A few very large losses were reported during the quarter-four institutions accounted for half of the total industry loss-but earnings problems were widespread. Almost one out of every three institutions (32 percent) reported a net loss in the fourth quarter. Only 36 percent of institutions reported year-over-year increases in quarterly earnings, and only 34 percent reported higher quarterly ROAs.
I could go on, but you you get the idea. The news of the underlying economy has been terrible (at best). And that's what's causing the problems.
The economy had nothing to do with ........
his jumping to grow BIG and BIGGER government; he was going to do that regardless of the economy. Obama is for big government and was WAAAY before he was elected. The economy was a good excuse to scare people into electing him, as if this country couldn't pick itself up, get rid of the bad, new companies come in, and the economy would continue all on its own, WITHOUT Obama's interference. But, of course, he jumped at the chance to push his HUGE government agenda by taxing us to death. Please don't tell me you won't pay any taxes. How in the heck do you think trillions of dollars of debt will be repaid..... and no, it won't be those mean old "rich" people everyone loves to hate and it won't be the big businesses Obama wants you to hate, it will be YOU and me..... business will just pass their increased tax load onto us!! Way to go Obama!!
And the economy isn't already gasping its
So is theft of the economy! nm
xx
why can't the economy be first and we have the debate...
after it is fixed. Why does the debate HAVE to be on Friday?
I have learned so much about the economy over...sm
the last week but it has only made me see how much more I don't know. Pretty scary! We are all at the mercy of those in Washington and on Wall Street. Plenty of blame to go around but blame will not get us out of this mess.
The candidate who ran from the economy...
Obama voted for the bailout and that is ALL he did. That is not running from it? He still wants to spend trillions, won't say he is willing to cut spending, and wants to RAISE taxes in an economic downturn. You can't turn around the markets by raising taxes on corporations and the so-called "rich." Common sense should tell you that.
McCain has run from nothing. All Obama does is repeat the same old vagaries and NEVER gets specific about anything, but why should he? You obviously don't care. lol.
The OP is talking about the economy. nm
z
Not as compelling as the economy.
x
In a McCain economy, you will be
su
Who has been in charge of the economy for the
Democrats own congress....... they are the ones responsible for the complete mess of this economy. But because there is a republican president, the republicans get the blame.
Republican president really can't get anything done with an all democrat congress.
He is going to do that by destroying the economy...
of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Ohio...making us all pay higher utility bills? What are his proposals? He doesn't want coal. He doesn't want nuclear. We CAN'T do it with windmills, not all of it, even T. Boone Pickens will tell you that.
Nuclear energy and building plants WOULD bring thousands of new jobs.
Sorry...his energy plans make NO sense to me, nor where he is going to get the billions, in this economy, to put his ideas into action.
He is already preparing the speech where he tells his faithful he can't do a lot of what he said he would do.
Snake oil salesman.
You are for, then....destroying the economy of...
the coal producing states and skyrocketing our electric bills...THIS on top of everything else, and he still looks GOOD to you? Amazing. lol.
Yes, and the economy with still stink. O will put us
nm
how is it going right back into the economy?
and WHO is it benefiting?
and one more thing... if this was McCain's inauguration, you would have no problem with the amount being spent either?
come on, be honest now
What would you undertake to fix the economy?.
Any better idea?
If you criticize, you have to come up with a better alternative.
fixing the economy...
I hope that by the time these projects are over, the economy will be better and the companies will therefore have new projects to move on to. The money that these jobs generate in taxes and in spending will spur more movement forward and we can hopefully start getting back on track.
Would that not stimulate the economy? sm
Think about it. If a person has a mortgage payment of say $500 a month (or any figure, really) and the government wrote a check for, say, $50K to that individual and it would pay off their house, would that not free up that $500 to be spent in other ways that would stimulate the economy?
People who are struggling to make their house payment, regardless of the reason, are still consumers and those consumers would be able to put more money back into the economy if they didn't have a mortgage payment. Isn't that the whole idea? To get more people spending more money so that more jobs would be created and so that our economy would grow?
Economy notice
Economy Notice
Due to recent budget cuts and the cost of electricity,
gas and oil, as well as current market conditions and
the continued decline of the U.S. economy,
The Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
So much for fixing our economy
Mr. President. This is the biggest problem I have with Barrack Obama. He is all about implementing his personal agenda and making us all dependent on government while it grows bigger and bigger that he doesn't stop to think about the consequences that these actions will have on our already horrible economy. All he talks about are the jobs he has created or saved and I'm sorry.....but I don't see that from where I'm sitting. I see people all around me losing jobs or about to lose jobs and cap and trade will most definitely cause more job loss.
Let our economy fix itself, Mr. President, and then we can talk about your personal agenda. Any person who wants to raise taxes during a recession is a complete and utter moron. Obama is doing nothing but hurting the middle class....which is the class he professed to want to help so badly.
I have no doubt that Obama is smart or he wouldn't be where he is at. However, I think he lacks the experience to be our president. I personally feel that any person wanting to be president of the US should be required to have run or owned a business in the past.
I tell ya what....come 2012....I'm seriously going to be looking outside the box for our next president. Not only will I thoroughly check out the pub and dem candidate but I'm going to check out the indepedents a lot more than I ever have in the past. I think it is about time we show the two parties that they both suck and we have decided to go against both of them. Maybe that will wake them up because this going back and forth between pub and crat hasn't done us much good here lately.
|
