What happened to "Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!"?
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Sunday, May 3, 2026 17:28
VIEWED: 2894
PAGE 1 of 3
Quote:
I thought they were elected on the promise that they would do everything to achieve their "primary focus": jobs!?
If House Republicans have their way this summer, the Bush-era tax cuts would become permanent, "Obamacare" would begin to be dismantled and energy regulations would be rolled back.
On Friday, House GOP leaders unveiled their summer agenda with an eye on the fall campaign, including those and other items that probably won't become law, but will highlight the party's message on the economy.
In a memo to GOP members, Majority Leader Eric Cantor promised a vote on the most contentious issue --extending the Bush-era tax cuts that expire at the end of the year — before the House begins its monthlong summer break in August http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/25/politics/gop-congress-wish-list/index.ht
ml
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I thought they were elected on the promise that they would do everything to achieve their "primary focus": jobs!?
That was THEN. NOW it's about getting re-elected, and making sure Obama isn't.
( Actually, that is about the jobs they care about: their own.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Republicans argued in 2010 that making the tax cuts permanent would spur job creation. Uncertainty in this area has been a leading cause of the delay in jobs creation,
I note for the record that the Bush tax cuts prevented the 2001-2002 recession and helped lead to record low unemployment through the end of 2006, which happens to be about the tine Democrats took control of Congress.
H
Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
...and caused a massive increase in the debt. You want to put money into people's hands to drive the economy you can do it in many ways including tax cuts. Just don't think that tax cut will have the same effect if you cut spending elsewhere to pat for them.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
...and caused a massive increase in the debt. You want to put money into people's hands to drive the economy you can do it in many ways including tax cuts. Just don't think that tax cut will have the same effect if you cut spending elsewhere to pat for them.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
Historically tax cuts lead to increased revenue and spurs economic growth. The debt problem is because historically we've spent in excess of those higher revenues and the growth rate. In fact spending during the last 2 years of the Bush administration was very high, but nothing in the history of the world compares to spending in 2009 and 2010. I note for the record Democrats controlled congress during that four year period.
H
Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
The Republicans argued in 2010 that making the tax cuts permanent would spur job creation. Uncertainty in this area has been a leading cause of the delay in jobs creation,
I note for the record that the Bush tax cuts prevented the 2001-2002 recession and helped lead to record low unemployment through the end of 2006, which happens to be about the tine Democrats took control of Congress.
Actually, those record low unemployment numbers were under Clinton's leadership, not Bush's.
Look it up. Unemployment started climbing practically the day Dubya took the oath, and never again achieved the historic lows of Clinton's time in office.
Romney said that unemployment numbers that were anything above 4 percent were nothing to celebrate. The last time they were close to that was under Bill Clinton. Bush never did it, and Romney never even got close in Massachusetts.
Sound like he's endorsing the Democrats.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
...and caused a massive increase in the debt. You want to put money into people's hands to drive the economy you can do it in many ways including tax cuts. Just don't think that tax cut will have the same effect if you cut spending elsewhere to pat for them.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
Historically tax cuts lead to increased revenue and spurs economic growth. The debt problem is because historically we've spent in excess of those higher revenues and the growth rate. In fact spending during the last 2 years of the Bush administration was very high, but nothing in the history of the world compares to spending in 2009 and 2010. I note for the record Democrats controlled congress during that four year period.
H
Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012
Historically, you're as full of shit as usual.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Historically tax cuts lead to increased revenue and spurs economic growth. The debt problem is because historically we've spent in excess of those higher revenues and the growth rate. In fact spending during the last 2 years of the Bush administration was very high, but nothing in the history of the world compares to spending in 2009 and 2010. I note for the record Democrats controlled congress during that four year period.
That all depends on where you are on the Laffer curve, and who you are giving the tax breaks to.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I thought they were elected on the promise that they would do everything to achieve their "primary focus": jobs!?
That was THEN. NOW it's about getting re-elected, and making sure Obama isn't.
( Actually, that is about the jobs they care about: their own.)
NOBC nailing it on the head!
Just like GWB was going to reform social security (which I wish he did) and outlaw gay marriage (which I'm glad he didn't), which BTW were really the only reasons he was a 2 term-er unlike his failed father considering the "quagmire" of war we were still in (and are still in this day... even deeper).
Just like... well about every damn thing Obama said he would do before he got into office and renigged on.
Why even get mad about it, if YOU'RE not going to do anything about fixing the problem?
The only problem I see here is that unlike anybody else in the world who says things about another person or group, or makes promises to people who trust them, they are NEVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ANYTHING THEY DO AFTER THEY GET INTO OFFICE!!!!!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I thought they were elected on the promise that they would do everything to achieve their "primary focus": jobs!?
Still waiting for you to show that the Republican Platform's "primary focus" was on jobs.
Sure, it was in there, along with less government spending, lower taxes, and a strong defense, but "primary focus"?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME