It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Which Republican Candidate Has The Best Plan To Create Jobs ?

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

Yes I agree it's a good place to start and I don't have a problem with the oil companies making money as long as they put Americans back to work. If America stopped buying oil products from other countries it would solve a lot of our problems. There's plenty of oil to drill for right here in the USA but the PTB want to keep us dependent on foreign oil and that needs to change.

Land based drilling is ok with me but I don't like the idea of offshore drilling.

Romney did include utilizing natural resources in his jobs plan but I think Perry would be a better choice to make it all happen since he's already familiar with and involved with the relevant industry players. That doesn't mean I'm voting for Perry, I'm still undecided and waiting to see how things progress.


And here you are buying into the shell game. Most of the oil America consumes comes from the US or Canada. It does not matter how much drilling you allow to happen here. Oil is a globally traded commodity, the price is set on the global stage, simply drilling more here does not equal us not buying less from anywhere else. In the end us drilling more here will have little impact on the overall price of oil. We drill more other countries will simply drill less to keep the price in the range they want. So now the decision becomes spoil our lands and risk possible devastation to our environment with no real gain to benefit a few or keep our environment, lands and resources intact and develop alternate energy sources.
edit on 15-10-2011 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


More drilling here in the USA = more jobs for Americans

Are you not for job creation ? Do you want Americans to stay unemployed ?


Some figures on oil imports


The United States has been importing oil since at least 1910 (according to DoE statistics), when a mere 557 thousand barrels of oil were brought into the country. Last year, the U.S. imported 3,670,403 thousand barrels of oil. Of those 3.67 billion barrels of oil, the U.S. imported from a total of 42 different countries. The top 5 importing countries were Canada (16.34%), Mexico (15.42%), Saudi Arabia (14.30%), Venezuela (12.24%), and Nigeria (10.54%), for a total of 68.84% of all American imports.

dunner99.blogspot.com...



I would rather see American having those jobs instead of supporting workers in other countries



And if I have to choose between a field mouse and a few birds

or me obtaining work so I can survive

Well then, I choose me



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


And just what exactly do you think is going to happen? Just look at the mess in North Dakota right now, yes they have an oil boom going on and a complete lack of infrastructure to support it. And there will be lots more jobs there come spring, but that is going to be a harsh winter without enough housing for those already there. Not to mention what the lack of sanitation will do up there, you could very easily see a plague happen. All because someone wanted to create easy jobs and put no thought on how to support them.

And it is perfectly ok to want jobs and equate it to a field mouse if you want but it isn't that simple. We already know that we have a problem with bee decimation and extinction going on. Know what happens if we kill enough bees off? It will kill agriculture off in a few years. Everything on this planet is connected whether you want to admit it or not. Destroying our federal lands to create fast easy jobs that have the potential to destroy us over the long term is not the answer. People like you are more or less disgusting to be quite honest, you are the same people whining over your grandkids having to payoff the federal debt, yet would just as quickly leave them with a planet they won't be able to live on.

I am not completely opposed to opening more drilling, but also understand that to do it will require a degree of environmental and logistical planning. These chuckleheads aren't interested in any of that and aren't going to do any of that. And I have yet to see any part of their plans to pay for and clean up any spills, and oh yes there will be spills. There are consequences to every course of action or inaction, whether or not they are immediately apparent they are still there.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 






edit on 15-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I'm not sure about any of their job plans but I noticed a phrase used by both Bachmann and Cain.

"Empowerment Zones" WTH is that and what it is going to cost us?



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by TXTriker
 


It is conservative speak for the poorer areas of the country.



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Herman Cain's real agenda exposed:


Herman Cain’s deep ties to Koch brothers key to campaign

IOWA CITY, Iowa — Republican presidential hopeful Herman Cain has cast himself as the outsider, the pizza magnate with real-world experience who will bring fresh ideas to the nation’s capital. But Cain’s economic ideas, support and organization have close ties to two billionaire brothers who bankroll right-leaning causes through their group Americans for Prosperity.

Read more: www.washingtonpost.com...





Cain on 9-9-9: Some will pay more

Oct 16 (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain acknowledged on Sunday his "9-9-9" tax reform plan would raise taxes on some Americans but denied criticism it would help the rich while hurting the poor.

"Some people will pay more. But most people will pay less," Cain, a former chief executive of Godfather's Pizza who has never held elected office, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" program.

The acknowledgment of higher taxes could give ammunition to a growing number of Cain critics, including anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist, who oppose his plan.

Read more: www.reuters.com...



Meet the Candidate: Herman Cain

Our “Meet the Candidates” series continues with Republican presidential contender, Herman Cain, in an exclusive interview Sunday.

Video - www.msnbc.msn.com...
link - www.msnbc.msn.com...


Commentary from Cenk about the Koch brothers connection to Cain:




Cain has no jobs plan and is only out to help corporations and his wealthy friends with a tax break !

:shk:


edit on 16-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2011 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Ron Paul "We don't need more stimulus or phony jobs bills"



Is doing nothing the answer ?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Here's the Obama we should have had on day 1


Obama: "We Should Be Talking About Jobs"



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Ron Paul Jobs Plan

Eliminate 221,000 jobs !



edit on 17-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Oh stop fear mongering, keeping these jobs is no better than stimulus bills to the public sector. It is MUCH better off in the private sector, if ANYTHING.

Ron Paul's plan in spending cuts in the public realm, lowering taxes and 'freeing' up the market for more private competition will make more jobs than your 221,000 public jobs. Why are we paying 1700 people $160,000/year in the Department of Transportation anyways?



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Erm I'll never understand Progressive trolls so I guess we will ponder our ignorance for eternity.


What part do you have difficulty understanding? Our unwillingness to demand more taxes for us so people at the top can get bigger tax breaks? 'cause that's not so much "progressive troll" as it is plain old "not a moron." if you have difficulty understanding how to not be a moron, well, that's your problem.


And King County is the kind of place where a sales tax would be the poster child for fair tax... all those upper-middle class and wealthy spending like there's no tomorrow .. yes .. the rich and the wealthy all would be significantly more in sales tax than any other tax ----- because you don't get sales tax back.


And you live in Portland, you say? Is that Portland... Oregon? 'Cause, er, you really don't have asoapbox to stand on if so



posted on Oct, 17 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


The market isn't interested in competition.

Ron Paul is talking about adding 221,000 people to the welfare rolls so he can give a chunk of the public sector - paid for by Americans and their tax dollars - to his corporate buddies at a staggering loss.

Ron Paul's a #ing idiot, and so is everyone - and I do mean you, personally included - who thinks this sounds like a smart idea.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


This thread is about which candidate you think has the best jobs plan, have you provided one? I'd like to hear your choice and why.

People want change without change, do you not see a flaw in that logic?


The whole point is to minimize the public sector so that the private sector can make it efficient. Do you think private airline companies will grope their passengers when they could choose the airlines that fly them in the friendliest way possible?


If you want to resort to character attacks, good for you. Come back when you're ready to be an adult.
edit on 18-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox


Ron Paul is talking about adding 221,000 people to the welfare rolls so he can give a chunk of the public sector - paid for by Americans and their tax dollars - to his corporate buddies at a staggering loss.



Hmmmm,More Wolf Blitzer talking points?

Appearing on CNN ahead of the speech, Paul was pressed by Wolf Blitzer on how eliminating about 221,000 government jobs across five cabinet departments would boost the economy. He responded: “They’re not productive jobs,” he said.

Ron Paul proposes $1T in specific budget cuts

When Government spends Your Money,They dont spend it as wisely as YOU do.-Ron Paul

Doesnt sound idiotic to me.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 



The whole point is to minimize the public sector so that the private sector can make it efficient


Actually that will probably equate to exponential profits for the corporations and slave labor working conditions for the employees which is now the norm.

No matter how you slice or dice it, most of these job losses will be permanent and will not return in the private sector and for America right now at this point in time,

MORE unemployment is bad news.

edit on 18-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Are you honestly saying the government was supposed to grow to this insanely large size and maintain itself? the whole point of the constitution was to limit the powers of the federal government, keep things small and simple, don't over-complicate things and let the free market work its magic.

I'm all for jobs for people that have families to take care of, mouths to feed, and charities to donate to but when it comes down to the bottom line, how can we keep borrowing and printing money out of thin air just to keep this inflated economy propped up? Why has jobs in the private sector been going down but up in the public sector? something is awfully wrong with that scenario.

Like I said earlier, you can't get change without any change. Somebody, somewhere, has to hurt and its either going to be now or it can be later but will just hurt more down the line.

I mean seriously, propose something that works because printing our way out of debt obviously hasn't been working and won't work down the line. And please don't tell me 999 is going to fix everything.
edit on 18-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by easynow
 


Are you honestly saying the government was supposed to grow to this insanely large size and maintain itself? the whole point of the constitution was to limit the powers of the federal government, keep things small and simple, don't over-complicate things and let the free market work its magic.

I'm all for jobs for people that have families to take care of, mouths to feed, and charities to donate to but when it comes down to the bottom line, how can we keep borrowing and printing money out of thin air just to keep this inflated economy propped up? Why has jobs in the private sector been going down but up in the public sector? something is awfully wrong with that scenario.

Like I said earlier, you can't get change without any change. Somebody, somewhere, has to hurt and its either going to be now or it can be later but will just hurt more down the line.

I mean seriously, propose something that works because printing our way out of debt obviously hasn't been working and won't work down the line. And please don't tell me 999 is going to fix everything.
edit on 18-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


Nowhere in this thread did I say anything like "the government was supposed to grow this insanely large" or "Cains plan will fix everything".

Stop putting words in my mouth and spinning what I said to suit your agenda. Just stop it !

Having to keep correcting you and set the record straight is really annoying and makes me not want to reply to your posts. Maybe your doing it on purpose ? idunno



Right now the problem with the economy is people are not buying things and part of that reason is because the poor and/or working class and the long term unemployed (which is the majority of the population) don't have any money to spend.

My proposal is to stop sending our money to other countries and instead take that same money that would have been sent overseas and give it to the people in this country who are struggling the most so they can spend it here instead of that money being spent elsewhere. The people who are hurting the most need a bailout and when they spend the money it will stimulate the local economy which will produce a demand for products.

Other than killing jobs what's your proposal or great idea ?

edit on 18-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by easynow
 


Are you honestly saying the government was supposed to grow to this insanely large size and maintain itself? the whole point of the constitution was to limit the powers of the federal government, keep things small and simple, don't over-complicate things and let the free market work its magic.

I'm all for jobs for people that have families to take care of, mouths to feed, and charities to donate to but when it comes down to the bottom line, how can we keep borrowing and printing money out of thin air just to keep this inflated economy propped up? Why has jobs in the private sector been going down but up in the public sector? something is awfully wrong with that scenario.

Like I said earlier, you can't get change without any change. Somebody, somewhere, has to hurt and its either going to be now or it can be later but will just hurt more down the line.

I mean seriously, propose something that works because printing our way out of debt obviously hasn't been working and won't work down the line. And please don't tell me 999 is going to fix everything.
edit on 18-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)


Nowhere in this thread did I say anything like "the government was supposed to grow this insanely large" or "Cains plan will fix everything".

Stop putting words in my mouth and spinning what I said to suit your agenda. Just stop it !

Having to keep correcting you and set the record straight is really annoying and makes me not want to reply to your posts. Maybe your doing it on purpose ? idunno



Right now the problem with the economy is people are not buying things and part of that reason is because the poor and/or working class and the long term unemployed (which is the majority of the population) don't have any money to spend.

My proposal is to stop sending our money to other countries and instead take that same money that would have been sent overseas and give it to the people in this country who are struggling the most so they can spend it here instead of that money being spent elsewhere. The people who are hurting the most need a bailout and when they spend the money it will stimulate the local economy which will produce a demand for products.

Other than killing jobs what's your proposal or great idea ?

edit on 18-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)


I said please don't say the 999 plan, never accused you of saying that and you only supported your position of keeping wasteful government jobs and the only way of doing that is to maintain the size of government or to grow it. You can't keep the amount of government jobs and cut the size at the same time, that is pure logic and if you can't handle logic, I can't help you there.

Yes your proposal is what Ron Paul has been saying for years, he wants to get rid of militarism and cut funding and alliances to other countries while living peacefully and trading with all. Imagine cutting wasteful government spending and letting our soldiers come home and spend their money in our economy, wow...that makes a whole lot of sense.

What is my proposal or great idea? seriously??? what have I been supporting this entire thread?

You can't keep the government inflated forever, eventually those jobs have to go if you want to limit the size of government to reduce the tax burden (to zero federal income tax, per Ron Paul) on the people.
edit on 18-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 



I said please don't say the 999 plan, never accused you of saying that and you only supported your position of keeping wasteful government jobs and the only way of doing that is to maintain the size of government or to grow it. You can't keep the amount of government jobs and cut the size at the same time, that is pure logic and if you can't handle logic, I can't help you there.

Yeah I understand but you floating the idea the way you did makes it appear as if that's something I said or advocate and interestingly you are doing it again. Please stop propping up these erroneous arguments !



Yes your proposal is what Ron Paul has been saying for years, he wants to get rid of militarism and cut funding and alliances to other countries while living peacefully and trading with all. Imagine cutting wasteful government spending and letting our soldiers come home and spend their money in our economy, wow...that makes a whole lot of sense.

Yes Ron does want to stop the ridiculous overseas spending and that's a good thing but he (or any other politician) would never even consider my idea of diverting that money directly to the American people to stimulate the economy. For reasons unknown you seemed to have missed or ignored that part of the equation !



What is my proposal or great idea? seriously??? what have I been supporting this entire thread?

If all you can do is parrot Ron Pauls ideas then your not helping much. Can't you think of anything new or original or something Ron Paul wouldn't think of or consider like I did ?


You can't keep the government inflated forever, eventually those jobs have to go if you want to limit the size of government to reduce the tax burden (to zero federal income tax, per Ron Paul) on the people.

We all already know that but until there is a substantial decrease of the unemployment rate, all cuts that would involve tens of thousands of people losing their jobs have to be off the table or it's just going to make things worse.

If too many people become unemployed there won't be a country to save


edit on 18-10-2011 by easynow because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join