Originally posted by spruce112358Yep. Voodoo economics is back! And the guy who tried to stop it lost the election due to trying to be more fiscally conservative - lol!
Blumenthal: "And the main point about jobs in Connecticut is we can and we should create more of them by creative policies."
Policies require money. So Blumenthal wants to create more jobs in Connecticut by increasing government spending out of Washington.
NOT the kind of person needed in Washington right now -- no thank you! No way. Keep 'em out of there. Spend, spend, spend -- another program! Yippee! Deficit? What deficit?!?
Originally posted by spruce112358NOT the kind of person needed in Washington right now -- no thank you! No way. Keep 'em out of there. Spend, spend, spend -- another program! Yippee! Deficit? What deficit?!?
Blumenthal: "And the main point about jobs in Connecticut is we can and we should create more of them by creative policies."
Policies require money. So Blumenthal wants to create more jobs in Connecticut by increasing government spending out of Washington.
NOT the kind of person needed in Washington right now -- no thank you! No way. Keep 'em out of there. Spend, spend, spend -- another program! Yippee! Deficit? What deficit?!?
So many people complain about the deficit.
But every time someone proposes to reduce the deficit (whether it involves raising taxes or cutting someone's healthcare benefits or laying off teachers or closing a military base or suspending work on highway repairs), someone will point of that this will destroy jobs. Yes. It will.
But if we're going to get serious about balancing the budget, it will mean destroying jobs in the short run. But no one wants to hear that. All they want to hear is how we're going to create jobs. And neither Blumenthal or McMahon have the guts the tell the voters that fixing government is going to mean MORE pain right now, not less. Although few of the angry voters have the guts to listen to this either. So we end up with bromides.
Originally posted by spruce112358I have referenced the last Gallup poll which indicates that over 60% regard the economy/jobs as the most important issue facing the US while only 7% feel the same way about the budget deficit. If Connecticut voters are so far out of the mainstream as to reflect your priorities, than they'll vote for someone who voices laissez faire platitudes and thinks operating an organization like the WWE makes her qualified to represent them in the US Senate. Or they can vote for someone who shares the concerns of most voters with the present levels of un and underemployment and has some ideas as to what to do about it.
Blumenthal: "And the main point about jobs in Connecticut is we can and we should create more of them by creative policies."
Policies require money. So Blumenthal wants to create more jobs in Connecticut by increasing government spending out of Washington.
NOT the kind of person needed in Washington right now -- no thank you! No way. Keep 'em out ...[text shortened]...
Edit: Policy example: "And I want programs that provide more capital for small businesses"
Originally posted by no1marauderperhaps Blumenthal could have cited that poll and stated --
I have referenced the last Gallup poll which indicates that over 60% regard the economy/jobs as the most important issue facing the US while only 7% feel the same way about the budget deficit. If Connecticut voters are so far out of the mainstream as to reflect your priorities, than they'll vote for someone who voices laissez faire platitudes and thinks ...[text shortened]... with the present levels of un and underemployment and has some ideas as to what to do about it.
"As much as the deficit is a real concern, the people of Connecticut overwhelmingly believe that we should wait until the economy has recovered before we take on the very painful steps that balancing the budget will involve. But I do want to make it clear that any additional steps to spur job creation, whether it involves tax cuts or new spending, will likely make the deficit even larger for the next year or two. So I hope all of you out there that want us to "do something about jobs" fully understand what that means."
"And now I ask you Ms Mahon -- what do you believe is more important -- reducing the deficit (and making the job situation worse) -- or stimulating the economy (and making the deficit situation worse)? Pick one. But you don't have the option of just summoning Hulk Hogan to painlessly solve all the problems."
I went to the Blumenthal for Senate website and it had this to say about small business:
Small Businesses
In these tough economic times, it’s harder than ever for small businesses to get started and keep going. Tight credit and high costs continue to hurt new and existing businesses trying to expand or simply stay afloat. High unemployment means plenty of people who are eager to get back to work, but many small business owners still can’t afford to hire.
As I travel around our state, I talk with so many small business owners who feel Washington just isn’t listening. They’re wondering why it’s so easy for politicians to find the political will to bail out Wall Street, but so tough to do more for the entrepreneurs whose great ideas and hard work are both the real source of America’s prosperity and critical to our economic strength.
If we want to create jobs and economic opportunity, we need to embrace new ways to help small businesses and innovators succeed. We’ve got to listen to our small business owners and entrepreneurs and put their good, common-sense ideas to work.
Innovation. We must promote technological innovation, the key to building new industries and creating new jobs.
•R&D Tax Credit: The Research and Development Tax Credit encourages innovation in companies small and large. It should not just be extended, it should be made permanent. Extension alone creates enormous uncertainty for businesses, preventing them from planning long-term research efforts. The R & D tax credit should also be expanded, a move which could raise total employment by more than 500,000 workers within the decade.
•Small Business Innovation Research: Small businesses generate the majority of new jobs, yet receive just a fraction of the federal research budget. The Small Business Innovation Research (“SBIR&rdquo😉 program helps small, high-tech businesses in their early stages, and has a proven track record of creating new jobs. I support making it permanent and expanding its funding.
Entrepreneurship. We must encourage entrepreneurs to create new companies, and increase the opportunities for these companies to succeed.
•Start-up Deduction. We can start by upgrading the tax deduction for start-ups. Right now, this deduction covers $5,000 in start-up costs. For an entrepreneur, every little bit helps – but $5,000 is barely enough to keep the lights on. This deduction should be significantly expanded.
•Elimination of Capital Gains on Certain Small Business Stock. We should also make sure tax policy helps to nurture long-term small business growth by eliminating capital gains taxes on investments in small business stock – if that stock is held for at least five years.
Loans. We must do more to help small businesses maintain access to the credit they need to sustain and expand their companies.
•Direct Lending. When banks tighten their lending standards, businesses can't access capital. The Small Business Administration (“SBA&rdquo😉 guarantees loans from private lenders to small businesses, but those guarantees are meaningless if banks refuse to lend to healthy businesses. This is precisely what happened in the fourth quarter of 2008, when fewer than half of the small businesses who tried to get a loan were able to do so. A direct lending program through the SBA, without red tape, operating as a backup to the private structure, will ensure that healthy small businesses can access funds even during a credit crunch.
•Commercial Credit Card Reform. Moreover, small business owners often tell me that when funds are tight, they must sometimes turn to commercial credit cards to cover everyday costs. Last year, Congress passed landmark reforms to protect credit card consumers from unjustified rate increases and other fraudulent practices. These protections should be extended to apply fully to small businesses which depend on credit cards to get through tough times.
Tax Cuts to Promote Hiring. We must embrace tax changes that promote hiring. I support the new temporary payroll tax holiday for companies hiring new workers, and I think this holiday should be extended.
Exports. The federal government has an obligation to assist small businesses in their efforts to sell their products abroad. Small businesses don't have the time or resources to match their products with potential purchasers across places like Europe and Asia. We must expand programs helping them promote their goods overseas, and work to improve access to overseas markets for small domestic companies. In Washington, I will listen to Connecticut’s businesses and fight for their interests just as I’ve done in Connecticut. Connecticut small business owners need a strong advocate in Washington – a fighter who will always stand up their interests – and that’s what I’ll be in the U.S. Senate.
http://richardblumenthal.com/Issues/SmallBusinesses
Maybe there's no pithy ten second soundbite there, but there does seem to be a lot of good ideas as to how government can help small businesses in the present economic climate.
Originally posted by no1marauderthese all seem to be good ideas -- but I don't think any of them will create enough jobs in a short period of time to convince the voters that the government has successfully "done something about jobs". And how many voters have the attention span to consider the pros and cons of any of these proposals?
I went to the Blumenthal for Senate website and it had this to say about small business:
Small Businesses
In these tough economic times, it’s harder than ever for small businesses to get started and keep going. Tight credit and high costs continue to hurt new and existing businesses trying to expand or simply stay afloat. High unemploym of good ideas as to how government can help small businesses in the present economic climate.
especially when MacMahon's response will always be "government government government!! -- we're not going to help small businesses by adding more government!! What we need is for someone to give government a SmackDown!!"
Originally posted by Melanerpes(Shrug) Even Rasmussen, which is very Republican friendly, has Blumenthal ahead by 11 in their latest poll. Connecticut isn't Kansas' just spouting some right wing, laissez faire rhetoric isn't going to be enough for McMahon.
these all seem to be good ideas -- but I don't think any of them will create enough jobs in a short period of time to convince the voters that the government has successfully "done something about jobs". And how many voters have the attention span to consider the pros and cons of any of these proposals?
especially when MacMahon's response will always b ...[text shortened]... by adding more government!! What we need is for someone to give government a SmackDown!!"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/ct/connecticut_senate_mcmahon_vs_blumenthal-1145.html
it does indeed look like MacMahon is on her back and the ref is slapping the mat.
a Qunnipiac Poll in late Sept did have Blumenthal ahead by only 3 points and a Rasmussen Poll from Sep 26 had him up by 5 - BUT the five polls in early October (including a Fox News poll) have Blumenthal up by somewhere between 7 and 13 points.
and Blumenthal is up 85.5 to 17.4 in the latest InTrade results.
Originally posted by MelanerpesThe amusing thing -- if it weren't so sad -- is the mindset that reducing the deficit (which government COULD do) is seen to be the job of the private sector (i.e. through growth).
[b]NOT the kind of person needed in Washington right now -- no thank you! No way. Keep 'em out of there. Spend, spend, spend -- another program! Yippee! Deficit? What deficit?!?
So many people complain about the deficit.
But every time someone proposes to reduce the deficit (whether it involves raising taxes or cutting someone's healthcare benef ...[text shortened]... few of the angry voters have the guts to listen to this either. So we end up with bromides.[/b]
While producing jobs (which government CAN'T do, but which the private sector can do easily -- look at all the money companies have built up waiting to invest/hire) is seen to be the job of the government!
It's actually quite a scary example of double-think -- and reason enough not to send anyone to Washington who buys into that mindset.
OK, here's what OUR government can do to create jobs.
Why don't we have enough jobs in the US? That's simple: low-paid Chinese workers who don't buy anything back from us.
The reason the Chinese don't buy from us is because they can't -- their currency is undervalued. The reason the currency is undervalued is because their government won't allow it to inflate.
So what does our government do? Simple enough. Pass an X% import duty on all Chinese goods. Suddenly, American produced goods are more competitive, and American jobs begin being created -- but manufacturing jobs, which isn't what we want. But better than nothing.
The Chinese economy tanks, they realize they have to do something, so after some severe soul-searching, they allow the yuan to float -- suddenly there are millions of rich Chinese (Anathema! Rich Chinese in a communist nation!) -- who want to buy stuff.
And so American workers leave off manufacturing widgets and slide over to provide whatever-it-is the newly rich Chinese former-peasants demand.
In other words, our government can stop handing out money they don't have and take on the task of acting like leaders.
Edit: And in all of Blumenthal's rhetoric posted above, that's one course of action I didn't see. One that would work.
Originally posted by spruce112358It's easy to blame the Chinese for everthing. Yet, plenty of rich countries (and some US states) have no problem providing enough employment even though they are also shipping in large numbers of Chinese toys and T-shirts.
OK, here's what OUR government can do to create jobs.
Why don't we have enough jobs in the US? That's simple: low-paid Chinese workers who don't buy anything back from us.
The reason the Chinese don't buy from us is because they can't -- their currency is undervalued. The reason the currency is undervalued is because their government won't hetoric posted above, that's one course of action I didn't see. One that would work.
Import duties have never solved economic woes. (though I'd be very interested in an example where they were successful)
18% of China's exports is to the US - China isn't going to "tank" merely because of some import tariffs.