FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

12/4/2009
Yeah, it’s the economy, stupid

It’s the economy, stupid Is this a loaded sentence or what?

House Democratic leaders are floating the idea of adding job-creating measures to a must-pass omnibus spending bill, and paying for the projects with repaid TARP funds.

You’ve read Karl Rove and others of his ilk, linking 10% to those 2010 midterms. If unemployment is 10% or higher, it’s a darn good chance the Dems lose their shirts – and the House. Gosh, I surely don’t want this jobless agony to continue – but then again, maybe just until November 2, 2010? (Eeek – I’m very uncomfortably conflicted…)

Anyway, more from Politico…

Using the omnibus bill and paying for projects with unexpended TARP funds would provide cover for Democrats on several fronts, source said. It avoids a separate jobs bill, which would be an acknowledgement of sorts that the first stimulus has fallen short. And it would provide Democrats going into an election year as the national unemployment rate is over 10% a bill they can point to showing how they are creating jobs without adding to the deficit.

Without adding to the deficit? Who are they kidding? The TARP money was “Emergency Spending” the first time around. So when it gets spent a second time, is that the time it finally “adds to the deficit?”

The Hill gets to the nitty gritty. This Democratic jobs plan is a huge $300 billion! Wow.

Lawmakers are calling for extending aid to the unemployed, infrastructure spending, a hiring tax credit and increased small business loans.

…. Aides cautioned that Democratic leaders in both chambers are just beginning to consider what will go into the bill, and that estimates based on standalone bills may not mesh with the final jobs legislation.

Oh geez. I know what that means. It’s $300B until Rep. Obey and his crew get hold of that dump0-it-all-in omnibus bill. Can you just picture the Appropriations Chair drooling in anticipation of that Christmas tree bill?

The breakdown of the $300B is all in The Hill piece, including a $27B Feingold tax credit proposal.

Tax credits for businesses that hire new full-time workers would cost about $27 billion under a proposal by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning policy group.

(I thought Senator Feingold was on this savings kick recently. Geez.)

So, it’s the Congress, stupid
Here’s the real deal Senator. Here’s how you get businesses to hire new workers.

Reform health care with modest, needed regulation changes and subsidy determinations. Nix employer health benefit mandates.
Extend current income and capital gains tax rates. Before 112/31/09.
Reform entitlement spending. Fast.
Toss Cap and Trade. Now
Abandon over the top work rules.

Yeah. That’ll do it. All without spending $300 billion the country doesn’t have. Yesterday’s job summit participants said it too.

Mr. [Fred P.] Lampropoulos [founder and chief of Merit Medical Systems Inc., Salt Lake City] said some in his discussion group agreed that businesses were uncertain about investment because “there’s such an aggressive legislative agenda that businesspeople don’t really know what they ought to do.” That uncertainty, he added, “is really what’s holding back the jobs.”

Update: Here are Eric Cantor's 7 common sense proposals for job creation. No $300 billion here either.

Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net

COMMENTS

Great Blog Jo!!! Hard to believe it is taking a year for the President to realize that jobs are created by mostly small business one at a time. When I was in business during the late 80's, early 90's slowdown the thing that got things rolling were significant investment tax credits. I buy a new hoist for my shop,write it off and put a man to work. His wages are spent locally. The hoist company builds more hoists employing more people. All the companies that make parts for the hoist keep people working or expand. All those downstream people shop and spend money in their town and on and on. What is so hard to figure about that??

JB

John Brantmeier (Fri Dec 04 07:27:05 2009)

Yea, I like Cantor's idea to "Eliminate Job Killing Federal Tax Increases"

A look at the first graph at www.demos.org and comparing it with recent job growth, tells me that this rhetoric about “reducing taxes and increasing wealth for those at the top so they can create jobs,” is pure hogwash. Where are all the jobs today now that the top 1% again owns 25% of the wealth??? Mostly in China and India. When is this new-found wealth going to be spent on American jobs?

And John, these are not taxes for "small businessmen" Cantor wants to protect. They are bankers and Hedge Fund managers and other high-powered campaign contributors. The Republicans are not your friend.

Jack Lohman (Fri Dec 04 07:39:19 2009)

Jo

I would never suggest that Republicans oppose good policy for political gain. But they should remain steadfast in pointing out the SHORT term benefit of jobs purchased and the long term costs of increased debt, meaning long term, fewer jobs. Most people have little to no idea how dire our economic future looks, with REAL debt on the order of $100 Trillion , and growing. Or about $300K per man woman and child. More government, more spending=more debt, fewer jobs in the future. No sense playing short term games, selling out the future. That puts Republicans in the same league as Dems. Unfortunately, that last statement applies to all to many elected Republicans.

Jack-

so I suppose the answer is to deprive the rich of all their wealth since they are not using it to increase jobs in the USA? You want jobs here? How about implementing policies that are more job friendly? Government now costs more than 60% of GDP, including regulatory and other costs imposed on individuals and businesses. These costs are reflected in the price of goods and services. One way to reduce prices is to produce in places that have lower overhead. So yes, money is going over seas to provide jobs in other countries. We could as well REDUCE the size and cost of government, minimize regulations, and far more of those jobs would stay here. That and eliminate all programs that subsidize trade, so that American workers are not taxed to have their jobs exported. So cut size and cost of government in half, and you almost DOUBLE the effective take home pay of everyone. I wonder if THAT would stimulate the economy?

To be sure, many Republicans are not your friend, as they contributed to these problems. And there is the reality that regulations hurt the little guy more than the big, and that under both Dems AND Republicans, welfare for the rich continues. Bankster bailout case in point. Recall that this regime is on track to accumulate as much debt in a little over 2 yrs as was accumulated in 8 under the previous one. Do you REALLY think Dems are any better??? REALLY!!??

Ken Van Doren (Fri Dec 04 09:17:08 2009)

I don’t totally disagree with you, Ken. And jobs and stability overseas have value in the stability of problem areas of the world. But wow, at what price? I take it that you have a job, so you and others on this blog are quite happy.

But the real answer is to get the money out of the political system and let the politicians make balanced decisions.

And no, I did not say deprive the rich of ALL of their wealth, but I do believe we should NOT give them as clear of a shot at the public's assets that they’ve enjoyed in the past. And I also do not believe that the poor can pull us out of this, especially with all of the jobs now in India and China. Perhaps if we had heavier taxes on the rich our country would not be in the poor house. Yes we must reduce government spending, but those funding the campaigns don’t want that. So it is what it is. Tax money must go to them rather than infrastructure.

And you surely know my answer: *NO* the Dems are no better. They are both bought and paid for. I’d like to fix that, you like the status quo.

Jack Lohman (Fri Dec 04 11:52:08 2009)

Good discussion but all at the 30,000 foot level. My point is that we need to get the small businessman to spend money on capital equipment, not just on hiring people. One capital investment has a long tail of job creation as the equipment is made and the parts for it made and so on. When we figure out that we actually have to make things that have value to enlarge the pool of wealth...not just redistribute it.

John Brantmeier (Fri Dec 04 13:03:03 2009)

You are right, John, but only if the capital equipment is made in the states. As I've explained here, the manufacturers have paid off the politicians to make it easier to make product abroad. That's what our moneyed political system has done to us. It's a trickle down, and you can't fix just the problems at the bottom.

Jack Lohman (Fri Dec 04 13:28:39 2009)

Great discussion on our economy! I was checking out this blog by Dave Westlake. It's the 11/20/09 entry. "Out of the Economic Frying Pan and Into…?"

I think too much government regulation always gets in the way of a growing economy and job growth. Yes, regulation needs to happen by the government to guard the people against corruption and greed. But as mentioned earlier, too much legislation makes business uneasy, and too many rules and taxes drive it over sees, or out of the state.

The "wealthy" receiving tax cuts? No problem with that. If I am not "wealthy", I am not hiring any people or starting my business. This idea that the wealthiest 1% aren't creating jobs...I'm not referring to Bill Gates type wealth...well, if I made even $100,000 (like a small businessmen and not the "wealthy") a year right now I could get no credit to expand a business and hire workers and order more goods. That is fault of government--Democrat & Republican--no one else.

A. Willems (Sat Dec 05 07:51:18 2009)

FYI Jack, I am self-under employed. Construction. But I have a better-than-average understanding of the notion that for government to fix my problems probably entails them hurting others.

"But the real answer is to get the money out of the political system and let the politicians make balanced decisions." Jack

As you prefer NOT to acknowledge Jack, I am AT LEAST as upset with the status quo as you are. You think the answer is to deprive people of their rights, without addressing the REAL problem, and that is too much money and power in government. Limit their power, you limit the size of the stakes, and if "special interests" know they can not buy power that does not exist, they will not spend so much trying to game the system. You ignore that leaving the money and power in government, pols can still buy the special interests using tax dollars. Likely, nothing will improve. But take away our rights, and much is being lost. If we merely required our elected officials to abide by the constitution, and not spend money that is not authorized, the problem largely would solve itself, without one new law.

Ken Van Doren (Mon Dec 07 10:41:52 2009)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend