- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 50,241
- Reaction score
- 19,243
- Location
- San Antonio Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
President Obama called Monday for a "full-scale attack" to revive the struggling economy as Congress returns from recess with lawmakers fixated on the November election.
The president, after meeting with his economic team, said the administration is "hard at work" trying to find new ways to promote economic growth. Though the election is on the horizon, he urged Congress to urgently pass a small business lending bill and blamed Republicans for stonewalling the package.
"We have to do more," Obama said. "Holding this bill hostage is directly detrimental to our economic growth. I ask Senate Republicans to drop the blockade."
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell countered that the bill would result in tax increases and that the administration's policies simply aren't working.
FOXNews.com - Obama Calls for 'Full-Scale Attack' to Revive Struggling Economy
Mr. President, the truth is that your belief that Congress can revive the economy through Gov't programs and spending is misguided and detrimental to the country.
The fastest way to rebound the economy, is to get out of the way sir. That means sweeping tax cuts to spur growth, repealing Obamacare, shelving "Cap and Trade", stopping the EPA's power grab to control CO2... basically it means abandoning most everything your Administration has promoted to this point. Because the economic uncertainty your policies have induced, business cannot grow.
That means sweeping tax cuts to spur growth
Can you actually provide evidence that Bush's tax cuts spurred growth and created a significant number of jobs?
Policy decisions should be based on evidence, and if his tax cuts don't work, then extending them seems rather arbitrary. Obama already wants to give taxcuts to the bottom 95% of Americans, so please provide some evidence that adding taxcuts to the top 5% would be worth the extra hundreds of billions that it would add to the federal deficit.
Sure we do, but those holding it don't want to lose control of it.Roosevelt essentially spent our way out of the Great Depression. But this time, we have a problem - We don't have any money left to do this.
Roosevelt essentially spent our way out of the Great Depression. But this time, we have a problem - We don't have any money left to do this.
Roosevelt essentially spent our way out of the Great Depression. But this time, we have a problem - We don't have any money left to do this.
Can you actually provide evidence that Bush's tax cuts spurred growth and created a significant number of jobs?
Policy decisions should be based on evidence, and if his tax cuts don't work, then extending them seems rather arbitrary. Obama already wants to give taxcuts to the bottom 95% of Americans, so please provide some evidence that adding taxcuts to the top 5% would be worth the extra hundreds of billions that it would add to the federal deficit.
Roosevelt essentially spent our way out of the Great Depression. But this time, we have a problem - We don't have any money left to do this.
FOXNews.com - Obama Calls for 'Full-Scale Attack' to Revive Struggling Economy
Mr. President, the truth is that your belief that Congress can revive the economy through Gov't programs and spending is misguided and detrimental to the country.
The fastest way to rebound the economy, is to get out of the way sir. That means sweeping tax cuts to spur growth, repealing Obamacare, shelving "Cap and Trade", stopping the EPA's power grab to control CO2... basically it means abandoning most everything your Administration has promoted to this point. Because the economic uncertainty your policies have induced, business cannot grow.
So "get out of the way" means actively doing stuff to help the economy.
Roosevelt essentially spent our way out of the Great Depression.
Can you actually provide evidence that Bush's tax cuts spurred growth and created a significant number of jobs?
Policy decisions should be based on evidence, and if his tax cuts don't work, then extending them seems rather arbitrary. Obama already wants to give taxcuts to the bottom 95% of Americans, so please provide some evidence that adding taxcuts to the top 5% would be worth the extra hundreds of billions that it would add to the federal deficit.
How do you help the economy Redress? That's the fundamental difference between right and left, liberal and conservative. President Obama is a Progressive minded fellow who believes that an economy like ours can best be stimulated with Gov't funding, Gov't Direction, with laws and decrees from Washington. On the other side are those that say Washington IS the problem, and needs to let the system do what it naturally tends towards, and that is profitable wealth generation. Onerous Regulation, Decrees from Washington, new Taxes and Fees, these are the antithesis to profit. Is it a wonder this "Summer of Recovery" is anything but?
:lamo:lamo:lamo
WRONG!!!!!!
FDR created a longer depression out what should have been a bad recession.
Nice try at revisionism though...
j-mac
Please explain how Obama wants to lower Federal taxes on 95% of the people when only 53% actually pay Federal tax. Just goes to basic honesty.
I recommend the Reagan model. A combination of spending and tax cuts. Oh wait...that is what Obama has done too.
Please explain how Obama wants to lower Federal taxes on 95% of the people when only 53% actually pay Federal tax. Just goes to basic honesty.
Reagan had the option to veto, right?Most of the extra spending during Reagan's term was due to the Democrats who controlled Congress, just like most of the rolled back spending during Clinton's term was due to the Republican's in Congress.
Reagan had the option to veto, right?
Reagan had the option to veto, right?
Most of the extra spending during Reagan's term was due to the Democrats who controlled Congress, just like most of the rolled back spending during Clinton's term was due to the Republican's in Congress.
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?