Reagan Budget Director Slams GOP for 'Theology' Of Tax Cuts

[wshc 46]

God the f***ng hypocrisy. And you folks fall for that propaganda that has no other purpose than opposing whatever it is the President supports.

So much for the intelligent conversation. I learned in my little pea brained part of the country that cusing in public was not acceptable and very poor manners.

As far as unemployment - it is an insurance, not a benefit. If the government wants to assist people that are still unemployed after their insurance benefits expire, then that is a decision that can be made legislatively, as you have shown it has been. I have been unemployed before and have used my benefits, so I know what is like to be in the waiting line with the people that are just taking advantage of the system. There are those out there. How many? I don't know exactly, but don't think that all people on unemployment are saints.

However, if this exchange has turned to insults, there is nothing more to say, good day.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

This conversation is over. You don't want to see the truth. Raising taxes on business will kill the recovery. You cannot dispute that, nor have you even tried.

Not sure it's me that is shying away from the truth. Of course I can dispute that raising taxes will kill the recovery and I have not just tried but actually shown it. Go back in the thread and look up the points I raised on the Reagan tax hikes of 1982 - done at a time when the recovery barely started and unemployment was still at 11%. That 1982 package was the largest tax increase in post WWII American history rolling back roughly half of the tax cuts done the year before. It didn't choke off the recovery and didn't stand in the way of further job creation. It's been done.

[Ban Hammer 13,474]

from the Brookings Institute:

a left of center organization.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

God the f***ng hypocrisy. And you folks fall for that propaganda that has no other purpose than opposing whatever it is the President supports.

So much for the intelligent conversation. I learned in my little pea brained part of the country that cusing in public was not acceptable and very poor manners.

As far as unemployment - it is an insurance, not a benefit. If the government wants to assist people that are still unemployed after their insurance benefits expire, then that is a decision that can be made legislatively, as you have shown it has been. I have been unemployed before and have used my benefits, so I know what is like to be in the waiting line with the people that are just taking advantage of the system. There are those out there. How many? I don't know exactly, but don't think that all people on unemployment are saints.

However, if this exchange has turned to insults, there is nothing more to say, good day.

Sorry but to violently oppose that for which one has firmly stood time and again is hypocrisy.

I don't think that all people on unemployment are saints - I know better. But I also know that we still have some 5 unemployed people for every job that's available. Reality is that not everyone that wants to work is able to find employment. Otherwise, we'd have to bury the debate on a lack of jobs in the country. If the argument is that people just don't pick up a job because they live lavishly on unemployment benefits then it's an admission that jobs are aplenty in this economy. You just can't have it both ways.

a left of center organization.

Hey, I even accepted points made in the Washington Examiner. They're nowhere near the center and they're not left of it either.

[Ban Hammer 13,474]

Hey, I even accepted points made in the Washington Examiner. They're nowhere near the center and they're not left of it either.

but has steven ever posted from anything right of center to support his point?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

a left of center organization.

One of Washington's oldest think tanks, Brookings conducts research and education in the social sciences, primarily in economics, metropolitan policy, governance, foreign policy, and global economy and development.^[2][3] Its stated mission is to "provide innovative and practical recommendations that advance three broad goals: strengthen American democracy; foster the economic and social welfare, security and opportunity of all Americans; and secure a more open, safe, prosperous, and cooperative international system."^[1]

Brookings states that its scholars "represent diverse points of view" and describes itself as non-partisan.^[1][4]

^{[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-research-3][/url]}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution

[Ban Hammer 13,474]

^{[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-research-3][/url]}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution

from your same cite: Some liberals argue that despite its left-of-center reputation,

where do you think i got that from, steven?

[wshc 46]

Sorry but to violently oppose that for which one has firmly stood time and again is hypocrisy.

I don't think that all people on unemployment are saints - I know better. But I also know that we still have some 5 unemployed people for every job that's available. Reality is that not everyone that wants to work is able to find employment. Otherwise, we'd have to bury the debate on a lack of jobs in the country. If the argument is that people just don't pick up a job because they live lavishly on unemployment benefits then it's an admission that jobs are aplenty in this economy. You just can't have it both ways.

No problem.

People do not live lavishly on unemployment for sure, but they will sometimes lower their living standards (if possible) to meet their income levels. To the point of living like they thought they never would. (Again, I am basing my experience on European unemployment systems and people. May be different here in the US. I have never been on unemployment here in the US, but it is still living from paycheck to paycheck and unemployment is waiting around the corner if the company looses a contract or something negative like that. No certainty in this economy.)

Bottom line is, there needs to be a better economy and I feel it is going to have come from the private sector not from the Government. All the government should do is not make it any more difficult for that to happen.

As my hero said, "The Government that governs best is the one that governs least". President Reagan also practiced this - "It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit." - I wish all politicians would feel that same way.

Best of luck to everyone..

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Not sure it's me that is shying away from the truth. Of course I can dispute that raising taxes will kill the recovery and I have not just tried but actually shown it. Go back in the thread and look up the points I raised on the Reagan tax hikes of 1982 - done at a time when the recovery barely started and unemployment was still at 11%. That 1982 package was the largest tax increase in post WWII American history rolling back roughly half of the tax cuts done the year before. It didn't choke off the recovery and didn't stand in the way of further job creation. It's been done.

Great, if that is the model you want then lets do it. First lets cut taxes 20% below what they are right now. A year from now raise them back up 10%. I could go for that. You just advocated a huge tax cut to get the economy going and the taking half of those cuts back a year later. Since the Bush cuts are now the status quo then this is where we start as a baseline. Finally, we agree!!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Great, if that is the model you want then lets do it. First lets cut taxes 20% below what they are right now. A year from now raise them back up 10%. I could go for that. You just advocated a huge tax cut to get the economy going and the taking half of those cuts back a year later. Since the Bush cuts are now the status quo then this is where we start as a baseline. Finally, we agree!!

No, actually we don't. We already had huge tax cuts to combat the recession - in addition to the still existing Bush tax cuts. Some $200 billion worth of tax cuts as part of the stimulus package. We're now in the early stages of the recovery and it's high time that we start addressing the deficit which we all know is not sustainable. That needs to happen with a mix of tax hikes and spending cuts. There's no fixing this budget with a one-sided approach. We can't tax our way out of it and we can't cut our way out of it but we can use a mix of both to get back to fiscal sanity.

If the consensus is that adding another $140 billion dollars to the deficit (the discussed two year extension of the Bush tax cuts for the upper income scale), then there's a better way to use those funds to stimulate the economy and to stimulate job growth. That way is to send tax rebate checks worth $1,000.00 to each and every taxpayer. That would make sense. Pouring it on a few that are swimming in money already would have little stimulative effect on the economy, would do little for demand and hence little for job creation.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Spirited debate is OK, but baiting and insults are not. Fair warning - keep it civil please.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Smaller Firms Still Hesitant to Hire

Job Growth Remains Modest as Businesses Hold Out for Clearer Economic Picture

By SARAH E. NEEDLEMAN

When it comes to hiring, Main Street remains reluctant to fully open its doors.

U.S. small businesses continued to hire in November, this time adding the most jobs in a month's time in nearly three years, according to payroll company Automatic Data Processing Inc. But job growth remains modest compared with prerecession years, and many entrepreneurs say they plan to hold back for some time to come.

Small, privately held businesses—companies with fewer than 500 employees—added a net 91,000 jobs last month, according to the ADP data released Wednesday. Though that was a sizeable jump over October's net gain of 78,000 jobs, the average net monthly gain so far in 2010 has been just 35,000 jobs.

By contrast, small businesses in 2006 and 2007 added a monthly net average of 143,000 and 79,000 jobs, respectively, ADP's data show.

A number of factors—including pending tax legislation, the ongoing credit crunch, and changes that owners made during the recession to stay afloat—are contributing to entrepreneurs' restrained approach to hiring.

"Like a lot of investors, they're sitting on the sidelines," says Raymond Keating, chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, a nonprofit advocacy group in Oakton, Va.

Small businesses play a major role in the U.S. economy, employing half of all private-sector workers, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. They have also historically started adding jobs more quickly after recessions than large companies. For example, small businesses added a net monthly average of 38,000 jobs in 2003, while large businesses shed a net 22,000 jobs on average per month that year, ADP's data show.

Within the small-business community in general, older, established companies tend to do less hiring than young companies, says John Haltiwanger, a professor of economics at the University of Maryland. And in the current volatile economy, both groups are in many cases "unwilling to expand," he says. "You have to convince yourself that not only are sales better now, but they'll be better tomorrow."

Delta Children's Products Corp., a 42-year-old New York-based furniture manufacturer with 120 employees, has seen its revenues increase for the past two years in a row after a 25% drop in 2008. But for the most part, the family business is only filling critical vacancies. "We are scared to hire," says Joseph Shamie, chief executive. "We are very concerned about the new taxes, the unfriendly business environment and health care. We are in the dark right now."

Similarly, TechSmith Corp., a 200-employee software company founded in 1987, saw revenues increase 25% this year after a 2% decline in 2009. But the Okemos, Mich., business is "hiring at half the rate we would be if I had more confidence about the future," says Bill Hamilton, president and co-founder.

Specifically, he says he's concerned about how Congress will vote on matters that could have a substantial impact on small businesses like his, such as income taxes and the new health law's 1099 provision, which requires businesses to file a tax report when they pay a vendor more than $600 in a year. "There are no guarantees just because the House of Representatives belongs to a different party," Mr. Hamilton says.

Other small-business owners are hiring cautiously because they lack sufficient sources of funding. For start-ups, these include such tapped-out options as home-equity loans and credit cards. And for established companies, bank loans remain sparse. The SBA backed $16.84 billion in loans in fiscal 2010 ending Sept. 30, a 30% increase from 2009, but an amount well below the $20.61 billion in loans it backed in 2007.

"Small firms essentially rely very heavily on the banks for lending as opposed to big companies which can issue equity on the public markets, engage in securitizations and other complex financial transactions," says Josh Lerner, an investment banking professor at Harvard Business School. "Given this, it's not surprising that we've seen very limited evidence of job growth in terms of hiring by small businesses in the aftermath of the financial crisis."

There are also some businesses that are unable to increase their headcounts simply because they took up smaller office spaces after shedding workers during the recession. This has been the case for Almar Sales Co. Inc., a more-than 45-year-old consumer-products manufacturer and distributor in New York.

Earlier this year, the company moved into a 12,000-square-foot space, half the size of its former location, after laying off 20% of its work force in 2009. "We needed to downsize as a reaction to the economy," says Allen Ash, vice president.

Though revenues have since rebounded from a 20% drop off in 2009, the company, which now has 130 employees, isn't planning to invest in a second location. "We really need to hire, but we're being very conservative," says Mr. Ash. "What happens if the first quarter of 2011 is horrible?"

For now, many business owners are making ends meet with fewer helping hands through a variety of strategies, including outsourcing tasks to freelancers. Last month, mostly small businesses listed more than 58,800 freelance jobs on Odesk.com, about double November 2009.

Meanwhile, Noon Turf Care, a lawn-care business in Hudson, Mass., since 2002, has learned to operate leaner. Matthew Noon, president, says revenues for the 30-employee business turned positive earlier this year after a flat 2009. But while he normally would have hired seven technicians by now to compensate for the increase in demand, he instead recruited four and added more responsibilities to several positions that offer commission-based incentives.

"It really challenges you as an entrepreneur to request more from your people," says Mr. Noon. "But the economy has been a great excuse. People are very grateful to have jobs."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704679204575647132964862358.html?KEYWORDS=small+business+tax

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

WSJ: Smaller Firms Still Hesitant to Hire

Perhaps folks over at Murdoch's WSJ should take a look out the window or a walk down Wall Street every now and then. Or try to report something a bit more recent than last year's news.

Private-sector job growth biggest in 3 years

By Ben Rooney and Catherine Clifford, staff reporters

December 1, 2010: 9:37 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Private-sector employment posted its biggest improvement in three years last month, according to a report issued Wednesday, while separate data showed the biggest increase in job cuts in eight months.

Payrolls among private employers rose by 93,000 in November, the 10th consecutive month of increases, payroll processor ADP said in its report.

The jump was bigger than economists had expected. The ADP employment report was expected to show a gain of 58,000 jobs in November, according to the Briefing.com consensus of economist forecasts. In addition, the October gain was revised by nearly double to 82,000 from the originally reported 43,000.

Employment in service jobs surged, adding 79,000 jobs. The goods producing sector added 14,000 jobs, the first monthly increase since March 2007.

"There is just a feeling that we have turned a corner, " said Joel Prakken, Chairman of Macroeconomic Advisers on a conference call with reporters. "It seems to me that we have left behind the recessionary declines of employment. We have passed through a phase where employment was flat."

The nation's smallest businesses showed the most growth: Large businesses, defined as those with 500 or more workers, increased by 2,000. Medium-size businesses, defined as those with between 50 and 499 workers, increased by 37,000. And employment among small-size businesses, defined as those with fewer than 50 workers, increased by 54,000.

Bummer - damn those small business being the leaders in job creation a month too early. Well, the WSJ will notice that next year, too. And perhaps then you'll see just how wrong you were with your argument.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Perhaps folks over at Murdoch's WSJ should take a look out the window or a walk down Wall Street every now and then. Or try to report something a bit more recent than last year's news.

Bummer - damn those small business being the leaders in job creation a month too early. Well, the WSJ will notice that next year, too. And perhaps then you'll see just how wrong you were with your argument.

Yeah, the WSJ knows nothing about business. It's typical that you sink to a Murdoch comment when faced with facts. And no, we will not get to see how wrong I am. The tax cuts will be extended. Some people realize what this last election was all about. So who really cares if you are totally wrong about this. You and your side lost and congress will pass the extension.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Private-sector job growth biggest in 3 years

By Ben Rooney and Catherine Clifford, staff reporters

December 1, 2010: 9:37 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Private-sector employment posted its biggest improvement in three years last month, according to a report issued Wednesday, while separate data showed the biggest increase in job cuts in eight months.

Payrolls among private employers rose by 93,000 in November, the 10th consecutive month of increases, payroll processor ADP said in its report.

The jump was bigger than economists had expected. The ADP employment report was expected to show a gain of 58,000 jobs in November, according to the Briefing.com consensus of economist forecasts. In addition, the October gain was revised by nearly double to 82,000 from the originally reported 43,000.

Employment in service jobs surged, adding 79,000 jobs. The goods producing sector added 14,000 jobs, the first monthly increase since March 2007.

"There is just a feeling that we have turned a corner, " said Joel Prakken, Chairman of Macroeconomic Advisers on a conference call with reporters. "It seems to me that we have left behind the recessionary declines of employment. We have passed through a phase where employment was flat."

The nation's smallest businesses showed the most growth: Large businesses, defined as those with 500 or more workers, increased by 2,000. Medium-size businesses, defined as those with between 50 and 499 workers, increased by 37,000. And employment among small-size businesses, defined as those with fewer than 50 workers, increased by 54,000.

Yeah, unemployment is all gone. It may be best in 3 years but you forgot that the last 3 years really sucked. So we are just sucking a little less. Big deal. Talk to me when the unemployment rate is 5%.