If you think Obama deserves to be fired on Election day for the bad economy, shouldn't we also fire Congress as well?
Which includes the entire GOP House?
The only way that only Obama should be held accountable for the economy is if Congress does not play a role in the economy.
No. The GOP has been attempting to pass legislation that I believe would help the economy. Which has then gone on and died in the Senate. So qualified yes, I would say fire the President and fire the Senate Leadership.
No. The GOP has been attempting to pass legislation that I believe would help the economy. Which has then gone on and died in the Senate. So qualified yes, I would say fire the President and fire the Senate Leadership.
Winson53660 said:What legislation are you talking about?
You mean like reducing taxes on companies that aren't making taxable income anyways and won't pay taxes regardless of the rates?
well it's funny how effective tax rates do change along with deductions.
The GOP pushed a tax reduction bill in the early part of the recession that cut statutory rates but left deductions in place. It doesn't matter what the rate is if you are losing money before depreciation! Having a 1% tax rate or a 50% tax rate doesn't mean squat if do not have any taxable income at all! This is why I laughed hard at the GOP "attempts" to help the economy via tax rate reductions. Firms losing money after tax adjustments pay no income taxes. Period. Regardless of the rate.
That I will agree with.
Well, for starters, the budget. I also think the REINS act would be beneficial not simply for job creation, but for federalism.
I'm pretty sure they have been pushing to expand domestic energy production as well (which would be huge), but I can't think of any specific legislation tied to that off-hand.
Congress bears absolutely no responsibility for the economy.
Agree/Disagree/More Cheese Please?
Well, for starters, the budget. I also think the REINS act would be beneficial not simply for job creation, but for federalism. I'm pretty sure they have been pushing to expand domestic energy production as well (which would be huge), but I can't think of any specific legislation tied to that off-hand.
Yeah politicians debating how much led is acceptable in food will be so beneficial :roll:
Domestic energy production is at an all time high. And I for one do don't want to see to see the market flooded with product.
Don't try too hard. There really hasn't been very much in the last few years. There's been tons of filibusters, and numerous proposed bills in 2010 that were basically just attempts to sabotage healthcare reform, but very little in the way of changes to make things any better for the American people. You can search Thomas.gov (the website that records all the legislation that Congress deals with) all you like, but you won't actually find much of anything proposed by the Republicans in congress in the last few years that would do anyone any good. It's been almost entirely obstruction.
it's all Bush's fault
Well then I think you should pay more close attention - or perhaps I am wrong. As I understood it, however, the lower nominal corporate rates were tied to complexity reduction, which aimed at keeping effective rates broadly the same. Generally I'm fine with that - I see no reason why G.E. should be able to pay at such a lower rate than Wal-Mart. Which is precisely as it should be, economists from both sides agree that having the highest corporate rate in the industrialized world helps chase business abroad, and that then our lack of a territorial tax system helps keep it there.
It still doesn't matter! You do not pay taxes when you do not make money.
And firms were losing money on basic operations, none of which are going to get affected by special deductions or credits. When your basic operations don't even generate a profit, it does not matter what tax rate you have. You do not pay taxes.
As a formal matter of federalism, the combination of Legislative and Executive power within a single actor who operates with Judicially - provided sovereign immunity is a dangerous actor; and one whom we went to war with once upon a time to get rid of.
As an eocnomic matter, yes; forcing large regulatory changes before the Congress will A) hold these people accountable, as they will now have to go on record, B) restore a large measure of self governance, as portions of America's regulatory law will now formally flow from the will of the governed and C) create a natural drag on the promulgation of large regulatory changes that lack a solid case to be made through the virtue of cost/benefit analysis.
And in North Dakota, unemployment is 2.3%, and truck drivers are pulling in 6 figures. Much of what growth we have seen can be attributed to the relatively small energy boom we have seen. If we want jobs, good jobs, good jobs that pay above the average wage, good jobs that pay above average wages for blue collar workers and good jobs that pay above average wages for blue collar workers that can't be shipped overseas, then we need to let that industry loose.
The EPA nor the FDA have anything to do with the Revolutionary War.
Yeah Congress is such an effective body of experts in their field :roll:
So everybody should move to N Dakota?
you are deliberately misreading the point. the level of delegated legislative power that has been placed into the Executive branch is dangerously misbalancing, and serves only to protect politicians from backlash while leaving us without the ability to correct our government when it overreaches.
Neither is Congress made up of tactical experts. Perhaps only the military should have the power to declare war? Congress is also not made up of economists - maybe we should look into removing their ability to levy taxes.
....Or perhaps they could do their job and translate the will of the people into governance, taking into consideration the advice of expert bodies such as the JCS, the CBO and the various regulatory entities.
Congress bears absolutely no responsibility for the economy.
Agree/Disagree/More Cheese Please?
Generalizations are just that.
The EPA the FDA etc are still under the thumb and IMHO I wouldn't mind giving more authority to the military to determine their own needs. Might get rid of 700 toilet seats. Or Rumsfeld saying the war would last six months and pay for itself.
the "will of the people" is fickle. at one time it supported anti miscegenation laws.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?