The Audacity of the Republican Party

Time and time again we hear the Republican candidates tout how they were able to create jobs in their states. How government under the right leadership can create jobs, and how the right candidate will create jobs. Then we hear from these same people that government does not create jobs, its the business sector that creates the jobs. Yet, these candidates are adamant that they were the ones that created the jobs.

While I understand that a government can facilitate the right environment for the creation of jobs, it is by doing less that facilitates that job creation. So how is it these Republicans can claim they created the jobs? Is this hypocritical to claim fame to private sector job creation, by a governor claiming government does not create jobs?

They are simply saying what they think their current audience wants to hear. All of them do it. They watch the polls then say what they think they need to have people like them. When you pay attention you see that they constantly contradict themselves. They get away with it because it's expected and everyone just ignores it. If they are ever called out on it they just backpedal and everyone goes "oh that's what you were trying to say" and then we move on to the next thing. I would love to see someone interviewing them just call bulls**t and call them a liar but that will never happen.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


ITs a simple concept. They plan to reduce the amount Government that is involved. Not that hard to understand. The current administration and party prefer to pick and choose companies to help or not help. They want to complicate the tax code so you never understand it, they want more regulations on companies so their environment buddies are happy but in return making business growth toxic and impossible. So I fail to see the audacity of the Republican Party. They are the ones who will attempt to loosen the grip of the government over the private sector and once more make this country completive in the International market.

reply to post by kellynap43


I am not sure if you were being sarcastic or not

But, yeah, that is one way of looking at it...they are interested in expanding the corporate empire internationally.

Obama will unveil a $300 billion jobs plan tonight during his jobs speech. It looks like Republicans aren't the only ones that have no clue that the government doesn't create jobs.

/TOA

Originally posted by kellynap43
reply to post by ExPostFacto

 

ITs a simple concept. They plan to reduce the amount Government that is involved. Not that hard to understand. The current administration and party prefer to pick and choose companies to help or not help. They want to complicate the tax code so you never understand it, they want more regulations on companies so their environment buddies are happy but in return making business growth toxic and impossible. So I fail to see the audacity of the Republican Party. They are the ones who will attempt to loosen the grip of the government over the private sector and once more make this country completive in the International market.

edit on 8-9-2011 by kellynap43 because: (no reason given)

AHHH

Globalization

Exactly!

reply to post by The Old American


Government can create jobs. They did it during ww2 and they facilitate the environment that jobs are created. If you decide to subsidize a jobs program. Which is the government paying for those projects, then yes the government is creating jobs. Not directly, but that's an argument of semantics.

Originally posted by The Old American
Obama will unveil a $300 billion jobs plan tonight during his jobs speech. It looks like Republicans aren't the only ones that have no clue that the government doesn't create jobs.

Government can facilitate liquidity, which is what is needed to spur on economic movement, which is
what is lacking during a recession.

Simple question for you.
If community organizers can't create jobs, why not give real leaders, with real experience, a chance to do their thing?

The government can create jobs by staying out of the way and not creating uncertainty.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


You are missing a bit of history in what you said. The reason the gov't could create jobs during WWII was because the people for the most part were making things for the military. A ready made market. Currently what would they create? We all know that Obama will not want to go the industrial complex route and the idea of repairing infrastructure begs the questions who will pay and where will the work be done? Will the lions share be done in states that vote democrat? And will it be in proportion to the taxes paid by said state? It sounds good be we have already seen with this administration that the devil is in the details.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


Yep. About time. Corporate means jobs. Jobs means we can get rid of this 9.1% unemployment rate that Obama cant seem to find a solution for.

reply to post by Janky Red


If you want to get rid of the debt, you become competitive with all countries, not just what is across the street from you in your down town square.

Originally posted by kellynap43
reply to post by Janky Red

 

If you want to get rid of the debt, you become competitive with all countries, not just what is across the street from you in your down town square.

AKA Globalization

And guess what?

Equilibrium theory of Econ; Competition

You think the Third world is gonna raise Wages 1000%

Or is

The U.S is gonna lower wages 1000%

You think corporations are going to cut into their Executive profits?


You guys are gonna kill America if you don't take a hard look

Originally posted by Alxandro
Simple question for you.
If community organizers can't create jobs, why not give real leaders, with real experience, a chance to do their thing?

The government can create jobs by staying out of the way and not creating uncertainty.

It sounds like you want Obama to save you?

I thought the Government is not supposed to be involved, yet it seems like you welcome
involvement.

But then next sentence, there you go again, no involvement...

Which is it???

I bet the certainty of removing medicare and minimum wage is gonna get people spending again, huh!

reply to post by hangedman13


I agree about ww2. However in this case infrastructure is vital for the nation. If you dint fix it it's going to fall apart. Where do you start? Easy. The most In need urban areas. Ideally it would be spread out evenly but ofcourse that won't be the case.

If that plan can create a million jobs. It doesn't matter where they are so long as they are there. People will travel out of state for these jobs. There will be corruption and favoritism as there always is. But something is better than nothing imo

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by The Old American

 

Government can create jobs. They did it during ww2 and they facilitate the environment that jobs are created. If you decide to subsidize a jobs program. Which is the government paying for those projects, then yes the government is creating jobs. Not directly, but that's an argument of semantics.

A person gets a "job" working for the government for $10 per hour. That $10 is paid to them via taxation on the American public including taxing the person being paid. The government doesn't have a positive cash flow by creating and selling a product for a profit. Government revenue and expenses (wages) are in a closed system, unless you count new money for wages being created from unicorn farts. At best, government jobs just give people something to do for 8 hours a day.

/TOA

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
it is by doing less that facilitates that job creation.

This is what Ron Paul says, and he is not boasting about how many jobs he created, so if you didn't know you were a libertarian I guess you just found out you were.

reply to post by Janky Red


Actually I don't need Obama's help, thank you very much.

The only person Obama is trying to save is himself.
Tonights speech prooves that.
All those hundreds of billions he's asking for is clearly to buy the votes he needs to keep his YOB.

reply to post by Janky Red


Kill america? We arent the ones who have made running a business toxic in America by applying all these regulations, cap and trade, and corporate tax hikes( that would be the work of Reid, Pelosi, Obama). Why would anybody want to run a business in america after what they have done?

reply to post by Janky Red


So you, in a roundabout way, are just simply stating, "Take the rich people’s money" that will fix all our problems. Besides the moral implications of that, it won’t work. It would be a drop in a bucket to how much our current president has added to the national debt. And to actually think that you believe this is a new idea or concept is laughable! You don’t think other governments and nations have attempted this before. It doesn’t work. Please try to accept that. If you can’t. Ask 19th and 20th century Russia how that worked out for them. They’re still recovering from it today.

What entitles the rest of Americans to the Executives salary? If that is how they allocate their funds, then so be it. If the business fails, because of poor money management, then this leads way for new business in the place of that one. Hence free enterprise and capitalism. The best man wins.

Side note: The American worker is mostly overpaid. The American work is not a good deal. Meaning the cost effectiveness of what you pay into it and what you get in return. You can thank the Unions for this. The American worker is like buying a 1995 ford escort for the price of a 2011 BMW. It’s not a good deal. You will get ripped off. With all the increase in min wage, benefits holiday time, sick leave, etc. Not a lot of other countries do this, and the ones that do are much like Greece. You can see how well they are doing. History speaks for itself.