Obamatrons: He has no idea what to do

[Anonymous]

Higher taxes, more regulation, more redtape, lets hamstring business etc. Now let's see how that grows our economy. I personally don't think Obama is a socialist, just someone who is clueless about what spurs economic growth. Hint: It's not class warfare.

[jsteele]

What do you think spurs economic growth? Let me guess. Tax cuts. Also, what cures cancer? Tax cuts. What's better than sliced bread? Tax cuts.

[Anonymous]

I disagree, I think he does has a plan, and probably a good one. Just that his plan is at odds with all the all the rookie congress member's who are playing chicken with the economy. He is going to try and hit it down the middle, but with the crazy faction of the R party, the middle is going to be pretty damn conservative. Even at the same time he's still painted as a liberal, which he is not ruling as.

[Anonymous]

Here's your Obama higher taxes, compared to the past several presidents:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-budget-deals-of-reagan-bush-clinton-and-obama-in-one-chart/2011/07/06/gIQA98w11H_blog.html?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost

Stop drinking the kool aid please.

[Anonymous]

The republicans want the country to tank and they are doing a great job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree, I think he does has a plan, and probably a good one. Just that his plan is at odds with all the all the rookie congress member's who are playing chicken with the economy. He is going to try and hit it down the middle, but with the crazy faction of the R party, the middle is going to be pretty damn conservative. Even at the same time he's still painted as a liberal, which he is not ruling as.

This is such a great observation. It is so easy to paint Obama as a liberal who does not know what he is doing but if you look at his record you will see that he is a lot more conservative than the party leaders. I predict that the deal with the house leader will include both tax increases (getting rid of tax breaks) as well as cuts to entitlements - the real battle will be whether both of them can get the fringe wings of the parties in line. I think they will get enough votes, but it will have to be with the help of moderates in both parties.

[Anonymous]

Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

Frankly, I just don't buy that this country has to kiss the a$$ of CEO's who are lining their pockets with bonuses, golden parachutes, etc., in order to get out of this recession. His adversarial tone is justified. The poorest people in this country should not bear the entire burden of this recession while the CEO's pay themselves, and we sit around and HOPE they will hire more people. Sorry.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

Maybe I have poor reading skills, but I missed your suggestions for what he should be doing. Can you point those out to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

Frankly, I just don't buy that this country has to kiss the a$$ of CEO's who are lining their pockets with bonuses, golden parachutes, etc., in order to get out of this recession. His adversarial tone is justified. The poorest people in this country should not bear the entire burden of this recession while the CEO's pay themselves, and we sit around and HOPE they will hire more people. Sorry.

You fail to realize that corporations higher tens of thousands of people who work and pay taxes and spur the economy. Not hiring means less economic growth. So if he wants to make it in to a war against business well, business will be forced to lock their doors, hire less, and wait until the tone from our leaders improve. How hard is it for you people to get?

[Anonymous]

We have one of the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world. Cutting taxes more for businesses isn't going to do anything.

Big companies are sitting on tons of cash.

If the private sector doesn't spend it and therefore create jobs (free market), then government needs to step in to spend more (stimulus).

Our whole conversation needs to be about job creation right now, not "fixing" Medicare, etc. Worry about that after we get back to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

CEOs are refraining from hiring not because of "the increased cost of doing business" (though they may say so because lower taxes benefit them any day and have the gullible ones out there believe them) but because there isn't enough demand. There isn't enough demand because people are drowning in debt, their houses are underwater, and they're afraid of losing their jobs assuming they still have one. That's what's called a Keynesian liquidity trap, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH HERBERT HOOVER SLASHED GOVERNMENT SPENDING, WITH DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES. There are rare times in economic history where government, through increased spending, has to effectively act as an employer of last resort, regardless of inefficient it may be. This happens to be one of them. It sucks because our national debt is already staggeringly high due to our quixotic wars, bloated medical spending and entitlements. However, NOW is not the time to slash government spending.
The GOP argument that we have to slash spending now because the private sector is more efficient is like someone saying that you should switch motor oils because your car will run more efficiently, when the car won't start. Guess what? He's selling you the motor oil and he's going to invest the profits in places like India or China, which are actually growing.

If the GOP succeeds in slashing my taxes I'm going to use the money for a longer annual vacation abroad and to expand my French and Australian wine collection. If there is any money left I might invest it in a Brazil country fund.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:[
You fail to realize that corporations higher tens of thousands of people who work and pay taxes and spur the economy. Not hiring means less economic growth. So if he wants to make it in to a war against business well, business will be forced to lock their doors, hire less, and wait until the tone from our leaders improve. How hard is it for you people to get?

Again, what should he be doing? I want to hear your ideas. Complaining is easy. What do you want him to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have one of the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world. Cutting taxes more for businesses isn't going to do anything.

Big companies are sitting on tons of cash.

If the private sector doesn't spend it and therefore create jobs (free market), then government needs to step in to spend more (stimulus).

Our whole conversation needs to be about job creation right now, not "fixing" Medicare, etc. Worry about that after we get back to work.

Corporations don't want to spend that cash because they're afraid theyre going to have to use it to pay higher taxes, and pay for more regulation and more controls etc. CEOs are terrified of Obama. CHeck out the responses at Sun Valley this week from the largest CEOs, they really think that the guy hates business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Spin Spin Spin. The fact is that CEOs are very pessimistic. The president is supposed to bring confidence to the US economy not scare people out of it. His tone and view of business is an adversarial one. I don't know where he plans to get tax revenue from when companies won't hire or keep laying people off because they're afraid of the increased cost of doing business.

Frankly, I just don't buy that this country has to kiss the a$$ of CEO's who are lining their pockets with bonuses, golden parachutes, etc., in order to get out of this recession. His adversarial tone is justified. The poorest people in this country should not bear the entire burden of this recession while the CEO's pay themselves, and we sit around and HOPE they will hire more people. Sorry.

You fail to realize that corporations higher tens of thousands of people who work and pay taxes and spur the economy. Not hiring means less economic growth. So if he wants to make it in to a war against business well, business will be forced to lock their doors, hire less, and wait until the tone from our leaders improve. How hard is it for you people to get?

What you fail to get is that I work for a very large corporation. Last year our division had record revenues and profits. As a result of that, the CEO, CTO, and CSO of our division gave themselves around 200k EACH in bonuses, as well as contributed a record amount to corporate. At the same time, I had to put up a big fight for my employee who makes 40k for managing 6 million dollars in revenue to get a .5% raise. Also, another employee went without a raise for the second year in a row despite a good review. This is the reality of what goes on in many corporations. Your faith that the CEO's will save the country is ridiculous. And I for one am sick of listening to their threats.