The debate over taxing the  rich has nothing at all to do with any efforts Obama has made that you deem failures.  The  tax issue is simply about how to best balance the budget and bring the deficits under control.  Obama's failure on that has simply been to get the Reps. to  agree.  But nothing has happened.
You can argue that his efforts to repair the economy have failed, but that's a different issue.  I would disagree with you but there, at least, there's a debate to be had.  It's impossible to prove what would have happened if the stimulus package hadn't passed.  I say we'd be in much worse shape than we are now but I can't prove that.  Besides, even though Obama "owns" the economy he actually has very little control over what happens to it.  This is especially true because it's a world economy over which he has no control.  Interestingly, the EU wasn't nearly as aggressive in combating the recession and they are in an even bigger mess than we are.

Increasing taxes on the wealthy, and reducing taxes for the middle class increases demand, why? Rich doesn’t spend money on things that create jobs. For example, up grade their house, buy a new washing machine so on and so forth. Generally they are looking to make more money.

Why do we need regulations? We do, otherwise the rich will run rough shod oner the rest. You have to realize the fact (if you are capable), historically most financial regulations, laws against price fixing, against monopoly, etc., was enacted due to rich and wealthy industrialist such as Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc. abusing the system. A bit of historical knowledge would show you why we need regulation.

Finally, economy and jobs are created in society that has rules, laws, regulations, infrastructure, administrative control, if you don’t no one will invest because they don’t know what the rules are. A great example is Pakistan, our erstwhile ally. Read up.

While you are criticizing politicians, you are drinking the Kool-Aid served daily by them so, what is your point in asking what, why and how?

How long will the average American voter continue to believe that tax cuts for the rich and corporations, and reduced regulations will result in a significant increase in jobs? If they do vote for a republican candidate who espouses such, it will be purely on a 'hope and a prayer.'

I'm not running for office, so what ever I might propose is irrelevant, much like what you propose. I'm just asking a question. And, I'm listening, to all candidates, regarding what they propose to do to create a significant amount of jobs, which it appears will be driven most predominately through increased demand for products and services. I haven't heard much from the republicans in this regard. Obama's shovel ready infra-structure projects were not so shovel ready, due to regulations, but he is working on reducing those regulations, and getting projects underway more rapidly. I think that's a good start in the short-term. In the long term, we need to invest in developing high-tech industries, and educating our youth and middle-aged worker for positions in this industries.

Talk about history. The rich industrialists, bankers and financial heads all had their way regarding making and maintaining wealth, before the great depression. That didn't seem to work too well.

Easy to sit on the sidelines and bloviate about what the repubs suggest as the right path, while ignoring the history of the past.  Fact is that Obama's efforts have been a failure, and the repubs ideas when tried before did seem to work.  How do you reconcile that?

But, if one were to accept your belief that the repubs idea is braindead, and if we accept the facts before us that Obama's ideas, tried and failed, then what exactly are you bringing to the table that would yield satisfactory results?

scares me.  I saw him on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and he can speak fluent Mandarin Chinese and he is also a Mormon.  I just remembered that when I watched the video in your article.  What is our world coming to Matt?  I made myself a fall bucket list recently.  I want to enjoy myself up until the end.  

Fall Bucket List:
Another motorcycle ride to the Dragons Tail to see the leaves changing in peak season
Build a fire pit by my horse shoes outside
Drink good coffee (I like a little kick of Kahlua)-check
Travel to Memphis for the first time and here some blues on Beal street
Talladega race- check
Fright Night-check
Cotton Gin Festival-check

see, I don't have to be rich to enjoy life.  but I do have a strong preference to be free and happy.  I hope I get to stick around for awhile to see how all this unfolds.

~Madison~

that people blame lobbyists, corporations, the rich, Wall St, etc. for the nations economic woes.
They are all playing by the rules set up by our government. It is the politicians that are corrupt.
The politicians are the rule makers and are the ones being bought.
The buck stops in D.C. my friends.

It also amazes me that some believe that by taking wealth, raising taxes, over regulating and increasing entitlements it will create economic prosperity.
Exactly how does that stimulate economic growth?

"FACT IS THAT OBAMA'S EFFORTS HAVE BEEN A FAILURE, AND THE REPUBS IDEAS WHEN TRIED BEFORE DID SEEM TO WORK"

When and where did SEEM to work?

Suppose, you do not understand “doesn’t work” .

Can government fuck up an economy? Yes.

Can government stimulate the economy? Yes again.

Control the economy, not unless you are China.

...and once that's gone, then we can start voting for Chinese Presidents.

I've learned sadly, the liberals, particularly the ones that hang around this board, suffer from some kind of a fatal disease that interferes with their brain's ability to comprehend a fact.  For the libs, the only facts they will respect, are the talking points from the liberal commentators.  Nothing else matters or can even slip into their brains for consideration.

It's actually become quite laughable to read their hyperbol about job creation.  Virtually every stinking company known to man has said they are not hiring because over regulation, obamacare, and fear of what lies ahead in terms of government regulation prevents them from hiring because to do so would violate their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.  Their only wise choice today is to move work overseas into more favorable and predictable business environments.  Period.  But yet these libs completely ignore this and instead want to bombard us with every fricken graph, chart, and speech that any lib commentator has every produced, and try to tell us that these are the real facts...

There is simply no hope.  You just can't fix stupid.

a n d   m a y b e   y o u  w i l l   b e  a b l e   t o   r e a d   i t.
"Increasing taxes on the wealthy, and reducing taxes for the middle class increases demand".
Then lowering taxes for everyone should increase demand even more, correct?
"Rich doesn't spend money on things that create jobs".
Really? So the good and services the rich buy are different than what the rest of the population buys?
The goods and services the rich buy just magically appear? Rich people don't buy washing machines?
The goods and services the rich buy do not create jobs? (clueless)
"Why do we need regulations?"
Can you read? My comment stated over regulation. Of course we need regulation. (some)
Why are businesses not investing now? Because of over regulation, and the promise of more regulation, higher taxes and health care expenses.
Business do not know what the rules are NOW and can not plan so they have all pulled back.
It is the uncertainty created by this government. Ask any business person.
Oh wait, that's right, they are all evil and should have their wealth confiscated and redistributed until there are all gone.
That'll show 'em. And then we can tax the .... ah... errr.....????
Drinking Kool-Aid? It would seem you swill from the trough on a regular basis based on your comments.
Well you did understand that the rich like to make money. But the middle class apparently do not like to make money. They only want to take it from the rich. Correct?
Some more cherry red for you? (do they make tutti frutti?)

Yes it is the rich's (job creators) fault that they play by the rules set up by the bought politicians. Give me a break.

You have failed to comment intelligently on any of my points or question but I'm sure it's because you just do not read or comprehend things very well. (sad really)
I'm sure you "think" you are intelligent but your comments betray that notion. You seem like the type to never let the facts confuse the issue.
I suggest that it is you who needs to read up, my friend. (or wise up)

I can't wait for your rebuttal. (sarcasm) I'm sure it will be a wealth of insight. (not) Or don't bother. (seriously)

Tax the rich is Voodoo economics for the simple reason that there are not enough of them. You could take EVERYTHING they have and still not fix the problem. Do yourself a favor and watch teh attached video, then perhaps you will understand why taxing the rish is just a liberal feel good scheme that will accomplish nothing.

Spendign is where the problem is, and a population that wants to suck off the public tit. Don;t believe me, go down to Wall Street and listen to the things they are asking for.

The only "fact" disputed was that Fatso does'nt hire cheap help.

As been said previously, there are no democrats that view increasing taxes as the only solution to our debt problem. You may disagree with how much some democrats want to cut spending, but to frame the argument in the terms you do is dishonest.

So, you want to give it another shot and stick with, and answer my question?

If asked about over regulation, your answer surely would be EPA, repeating another idiots words.


Look up who drives the economy stupid. If the rich were creating jobs and since their wealth has increased by 275% thus far, we should be importing workers from China; but that hasn’t happened, why? Wise one?

May be you want read a bit and before you come up with the ridiculous Liberal Media crap, it is from CBO, a non-partisan arm of the Congress. You can call them biased liberals or whatever, unless you compile the data and analyze it yourself (doubt), this is about as close to accurate and non biased you are going to get.

You call me stupid yet you are the one who can't read a post or answer with any intelligence the points I raised.
Your first response was a personal attack to a post you couldn't read or understand and then on to your liberal talking points. Typical of the left.
EPA, Frank-Todd and a multitude of other over regulation has stifled the economy. I work with bankers, investors and savvy business people daily. The consensus is they can not invest (create jobs) under the current playing field.
Your narrow, myopic view of how an economy works and your stupid false statements do not change the facts.
Your statement that the rich don't create jobs reveals are stupid you really are.
Why is the POTUS chiding the business community to invest and create jobs if they are not the ones who create jobs?
(no need to answer)
Why did the stimulus bill not create "shovel ready" jobs in the millions? (no need to answer)
There are so many holes in your weak argument.
The CBO? The ones that scored Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, etc.?
Yeah, they have proven to be very competent now haven't they? (no need to answer)
Your corrupt government has failed you. That is the fact.
The article you posted is only a bunch of liberal talking points that promotes socialism.
Of course there is media bias but not from your perspective of only listening to the voices you agree with.
You should really need to look outside your little liberal bubble of knowledge.
Now go hide yourself in your liberal talking points so you can feel you are an intellectual again.
Just because you may learn to read one day does does not mean you understand what you are reading.
You sir, have no credibility and are a moron.

EOM = End of Message for clueless.

"Virtually every stinking company known to man has said they are not hiring because over regulation, obamacare, and fear of what lies ahead in terms of government regulation prevents them from hiring because to do so would violate their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders."

Where's your reference?

Mine, regarding the issue of low demand being the prime factor for small businesses not increasing their number of employees is below in the link!

Skip to page 20 if you don't want to read the whole thing.

-- Modified on 11/1/2011 3:00:23 PM

-- Modified on 11/1/2011 3:21:41 PM

I was responding to pwilley. Page 20 says that those who responded to the question as to the biggest problem they face as: Poor sales-31%, taxes-21%, and Govn't redtape and regulations-15%. Yes, they are all problematic, however, the greater percentage said that sales was the biggest. So, how did I read that wrong? All I'm saying is that even if you reduce taxes and regs., it doesn't do anything for demand, hence increased employment.

The truth is seldom black or white, and that seems to be how you read things. Once again, I'm not saying government regulations and red-tape, tax some forms of taxes are not problems. Republicans however, want to make them the only problem, because admitting that demand for products and services is a bigger problem, because the average guy has less to spend on them, means they would have to address that issue, which in the short-term would require stimulus spending from the government. So, go on pretending the it's not a major problem, because I have a good idea why you want to ignore it.

My post was directly under pwilley's, not yours. DUH!!!

republican political strategists are pondering, so it's a legitimate question whether one is republican, democrat, or independent: "How long will the average American voter continue to believe that tax cuts for the rich and corporations, and reduced regulations will result in a significant increase in jobs?"

Want to give it a shot?

As I stated, (another lib who can't read or comprehend) I deal with bank offices, lenders, investors and a variety of business people and yes, RICH PEOPLE who create jobs, on a daily basis.
My reference is the only one that really matters, it is called THE REAL WORLD.
I don't have to regurgitate anyones talking points to know what the REAL WORLD is saying.
Your own link (Page 20) only proves my point that high taxes, regulation (and poor sales) are the main problems.
But you conveniently ignore the facts in your own link. Typical lib.
Your own facts prove you wrong. Man this is easy.
But its always easy proving libs wrong and that they can not comprehend the REAL WORLD.

I totally agree. But ain't it fun when there own links prove them wrong. (see below)
It is just too easy to prove them wrong.

And your premise is incorrect. Business is about taking risks.
Reducing regs and taxes will give businesses the confidence and capital to take the risk and invest.
That would remove the uncertainties and businesses would be able plan and invest again.
That will create jobs, creating jobs will get people spending and spending will drive demand.  
But one of the biggest drags on the economy right now is Dodd-Frank and the government trying to "fix" the housing sector.
Their meddling has only prolonged the foreclosure crisis, created more uncertainty, further reduced home values and tax revenues. Every housing program "fix" put out by this administration so far has been a failure.
Ask any lender.

They promised Reagan that if he raised taxes they would cut spending. Taxes went up and the cuts never came.

They promised Bush 41 that if he raised taxes they would cut spending. Taxes went up and the cuts never came.

Perhaps now you understand WHY conservatives have drawn a line in the sand on raising taxes. When democrats talk about cutting spending, they are lying. Since they have already done this in the past, you can not deny it.

Therefore, your question has been answered....

First point of order though, not sure where you got the question....

It is phrased in such a way as to make the reader think that the position is false and the average American citizen is being tricked into believing this position. It basically is a "when did you stop beating your wife" question.

So here is the real answer, and remember, we do not live in a black and white world. The question is irrelevent at this point for Republican strategist because the real position is that as long as we have a POTUS who is anti-business, the 1% will not invest and create new jobs, therefore the amount of money they have does not matter. The solution the Republicans will give is to elect a new POTUS who business feels will not penalize them. Then they will feel safe about releasing capital into the economy.

How do you breath living in such a vacuum?

Somethings are black and white. (Obama hahaha) But yes there are shades of gray in many things.
At least you admit that regs and taxes are part of the problem. We differ on the solution.
More stimulus will help how?  Why didn't it work the last time? Or under Bush?
Not to mention they fact that we are broke and there is no money for it.

I do not ignore the demand problem. But it is the result of the regs and taxes not its the own cause.
The solution is to get out of the way of the private sector. We have tried the stimulus way and it has utterly failed.
Your own link shows that the problem from a business perspective IS the regs and taxes.
That is your own fact.

while not under the influence. That way you could slow down and see where your train jumped the tracks!

Jobs don't get exported.

1. There is no law (yet) saying that an American entrepreneur must create American jobs in America. I am an part owner and investor in a business in Costa Rica, which employs 400. In all honesty, we would have loved to start that business in the United States. Unfortunately, the cost of doing business (and the current anti-business climate) in the United States was prohibitive. US business taxes are punitive. Communist China is more business friendly than the United States. That according to the CEO of Coca Cola.

2. Jobs do not belong to the employee. Jobs belong to the person who created them. The employer.