Jobless rate goes to to 8.2% - Unexpectedly

archer wrote: Can someone please explain to me what a "jobs bill" actually looks like? What makes the bills crafted by the Republicans jobs bills but those crafted by democrats are not.

Bills that reduce regulations and taxes for employers are a good example.

CritiKalbILL wrote:

archer wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

archer wrote: They didnt do anything to stop the bleeding if anything they stopped the progress...they stopped everything ...rather like a toddler stomping his foot and refusing to participate. Temper tantrums by grownups are never helpful.

What about the 27 jobs bills passed by the House that Reid has tabled?

What about them? If they can't craft a bill that will get bi-partisan support they are just spinning their wheels.

So what does that say about the budgets Obama "crafted" that got 0% support from either side? I thought he was so brilliant?

You never answered this question which I believe is relevant to your point about bi-partisanship. I know it's hard to answer so I'll give you a pass.

Has reducing regulations and taxes ever been proven to increase jobs? Or do they increase profits without really affecting jobs.? Where is the line to be drawn between protecting worker safety, protecting the environment, and increasing profits in hope that those companies will put the money into jobs and not into their investors pockets?

I don't ascribe to the libertarian theory that with all regulations removed companies will do the right thing. It's just not in the corporate nature to think much beyond profits to what is good for the workers and the country. Especially in a down economy with high unemployment. Without regulations they can, and they will, take advantage.

CritiKalbILL wrote:

CritiKalbILL wrote:

archer wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

archer wrote: They didnt do anything to stop the bleeding if anything they stopped the progress...they stopped everything ...rather like a toddler stomping his foot and refusing to participate. Temper tantrums by grownups are never helpful.

What about the 27 jobs bills passed by the House that Reid has tabled?

What about them? If they can't craft a bill that will get bi-partisan support they are just spinning their wheels.

So what does that say about the budgets Obama "crafted" that got 0% support from either side? I thought he was so brilliant?

You never answered this question which I believe is relevant to your point about bi-partisanship. I know it's hard to answer so I'll give you a pass.

I was speaking to bills, you brought in budgets (apples and oranges)....but OK, Obama has actually tried, and he made many concessions to Republicans on spending cuts, but the GOP will not allow any budget that includes revenue increases. The GOP didn't think they got enough.....the Dems thought Obama gave away too much. End of budget.....The only budget the GOP was willing to vote for was one that followed only their line of thinking......and the dems, rightly so, think that is giving away the farm, and a road to ruin for this country. Compromise, bill, means BOTH sides give a little. Yet, the republicans in congress have stated there will be NO revenue increases, and that anything Obama wants he will not get. That pretty much leaves us at square one.

Compromise is what got us to where we are now - $15 Trillion in the hole and accelerating towards the precipice. We need less spending - not a lesser increase to the amount that is being spent next year over this one - an actual reduction in the amount of dollars that the federal government spends every year. Federal tax revenues are 16% of GDP, federal spending is 24% of GDP. The average federal tax revenue for the last 80 years has been 18% of GDP - that is the tax capacity of this union. It hasn't mattered what tax rates were, what was able to be deducted or what wasn't, whether capital gains are taxed at the same or a lesser rate than income is - the average tax revenue over the last 80 years has been 18% of GDP - that is the tax capacity for federal tax revenues. The federal government needs to limit its spending to 18% of the union's GDP, and preferably spend even less than that amount - 15% would be a good target figure. There are very few years between the administrations of FDR and Obama where our federal tax revenues have been less than 15% of GDP - perhaps as many as 5 out of those 80 years. If you consistently spend more than you take in at some point you will have borrowed so much to keep up appearances that every lender out there realizes they have no hope of ever getting that money back from you, regardless of how many promises you make, and will stop lending you more money.

archer wrote:

CritiKalbILL wrote:

archer wrote: Can someone please explain to me what a "jobs bill" actually looks like? What makes the bills crafted by the Republicans jobs bills but those crafted by democrats are not.

I was talikng about a budget, you injected bills. I don't think we need a jobs bill, I think we need give job creators a reason to risk more capital. Seeing a massive tax increase coupled with an expensive HC bill isn't going to do anything but make employers leary of future costs.
Now I'll wait for LJ's usual slam on job creators...

It's not all about you bill....my question was prompted by this question.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: What about the 27 jobs bills passed by the House that Reid has tabled?

I simply wanted to know what a "jobs bill" is according to the GOP.

The same sort of 27 bills that Reid tabled. You do the homework. You don't have an answer is what this is all about.

CritiKalbILL wrote:

CritiKalbILL wrote:

archer wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

archer wrote: They didnt do anything to stop the bleeding if anything they stopped the progress...they stopped everything ...rather like a toddler stomping his foot and refusing to participate. Temper tantrums by grownups are never helpful.

What about the 27 jobs bills passed by the House that Reid has tabled?

What about them? If they can't craft a bill that will get bi-partisan support they are just spinning their wheels.

So what does that say about the budgets Obama "crafted" that got 0% support from either side? I thought he was so brilliant?

You never answered this question which I believe is relevant to your point about bi-partisanship. I know it's hard to answer so I'll give you a pass.

She can't answer the question. remember, never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to.

TLGOPT....I did answer his question a few posts up.

Your snark is unwelcome...I would just as soon not have any exchanges with you, but realize our posts will cross in some threads.

archer wrote: TLGOPT....I did answer his question a few posts up.

Your snark is unwelcome...I would just as soon not have any exchanges with you, but realize our posts will cross in some threads.

No you didn't. You totally avoided my question. But you did say "What about them? If they can't craft a bill that will get bi-partisan support they are just spinning their wheels." Then you must know what kind of bill I was asking about, since you seem to recognize a crafted GOP bill and it's limitations. And all I asked you was to give me a number, not even a detailed accounting of the Democrat bills. So... again... how many job bills have the Democrats crafted?

I answered bill's question....yours was just so much noise.