1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We've had very few donations over the year. I'm going to be short soon as some personal things are keeping me from putting up the money. If you have something small to contribute it's greatly appreciated. Please put your screen name as well so that I can give you credit. Click here: Donations
    Dismiss Notice

One simple question regarding Obama's Jobs Bill

Discussion in 'Tilted Philosophy, Politics, and Economics' started by Aceventura, Sep 13, 2011.

  1. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    I have one question, maybe two regarding Obama's jobs bill:

    If Obama is going to spend $447 billion to create jobs and stimulate the economy by taxing $447 billion how is that going to create jobs or stimulate the economy?

    If Obama is going to close tax loop holes by opening other tax loop holes what is the point of him saying he is closing loopholes, aren't they going to net out to nothing?

    O.k., maybe three questions:

    Does Obama think we are idiots?
     
  2. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Specifics would help. But based on your questions and my relative ignorance on the details you're point at:

    1) That's where stimulus money comes from: taxes and other revenue.

    2) Not all loopholes are equal. What loopholes is he opening?

    3) Probably not.
     
  3. What I heard the president say was that tax incentives would be tied to hiring, with specifically targeted groups of the unemployed providing the biggest bang. A portion, at least, of the tax give-backs would likely be offset by the tax revenue provided by the newly employed, I should think.

    If some loopholes get closed, while others are opened, the benefits get shifted to a different group. If small to medium sized businesses step up to take advantage, local economies grow. Beats the hell out of hording everything in the financial markets and multinational corporations.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Bodkin van Horn

    Bodkin van Horn One of the Four Horsewomyn of the Fempocalypse

    Apparently, there is a lot of money that could be spend creating jobs which isn't. I suspect the goal is to take this money, which is currently not doing anything for anyone and do something with it.

    What are you talking about? Which loopholes is he opening?

    Probably. I'd be hard pressed to take a wide view of American politics and not come away with the impression that we are idiots.
     
  5. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    Just to give an example, Obama is going to give a tax credit to the business who hires a long-term unemployed person. On the other-side Obama is going to change the tax code so that some health care plans paid for by a business is taxable income. So, a small business owner may get a one time tax credit for hiring an employee and then have to pay higher taxes on the health insurance he is getting from his business.

    The tax credit for hiring an employee is a loop hole.
    --- merged: Sep 14, 2011 4:03 PM ---
    I have made this point before.

    In some businesses they can spend a $1 today and then realize additional income almost immediately. For example a restaurant may be able to run a promotion with an ad in a newspaper, hire a few additional people for the weekend, increase sales, then have the cash to pay for the ad and the employees.

    In other businesses, if you spend $1 today it may take 45/60/90/120 days before they see income from spending the money (and it is possible not to see any money at all). For these businesses, you need access to credit to grow. currently small business does not have access to credit. Only perfect risks are getting credit. In a business like this they can not hire new people, tax credits or not, without some access to credit or money to do some hiring. For many businesses Obama's plan is of no value.

    People with cash, who are "hording" it, are doing it for a reason - uncertainty. Obama's best course of action is to eliminate or minimize uncertainty coming from Washington. His plan does the opposite. Only now are some of the finer details coming out and it is going to take months for this thing to be discussed and debated in Congress. So we are look at another few months down the drain.
     
  6. redux

    redux Very Tilted

    Location:
    Foggy Bottom
    The tax relief is in the form of cutting the payroll tax in half for employers (and cutting employers share completely for new hires) and employees (resulting in an estimated $1,500 tax cuts for middle class workers) and tax credits for hiring unemployed veterans and extending small business tax credits that were in the stimulus act.

    It is paid for by limiting certain itemized deductions for top wage earners, ending tax subsidies to oil companies and taxing hedge fund (and other investment fund) transactions at ordinary income rather than capitol gains NOT a higher tax on employer-paid health plans.

    The new tax credits are targeted to small business job creation and putting more money in the pocket of middle class workers to spend. Oil companies and hedge fund mangers have done little or nothing to create jobs while making record profits and personal fortunes; eliminating these tax benefits will certainly not discourage job creation.

    I cant speak for Obama, but I would say ideologues not idiots.
     
  7. Bodkin van Horn

    Bodkin van Horn One of the Four Horsewomyn of the Fempocalypse

    I suspect there would be a lot more certainty if certain members of congress weren't intent on using short term political gain as a motivation for blocking any and all reasonable legislation proposed by the president. In other words, you can't lay all the blame on Obama, since he has very clearly tried to do specific things but has been stymied by people who admittedly care more about trying to ensure he's a one-termer than they do about creating a single job.
     
  8. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    One provision I have read about conflicts with the above.

    http://www.news-medical.net/news/20...or-Taxing-health-benefits-of-the-wealthy.aspx

    Another loop hole Obama's Jobs bill is planning on closing is the "Corporate Jet Loophole". Let's walk-through this and see how it may or may not impact jobs.

    A small business owner has always dreamed of getting his pilot license and owning a small jet. With the current "tax loop hole" he finally decides to take the plunge and make his dream a reality. He contracts with a fight school to learn to fly and get his air time in (jobs). He buys a jet from the local jet dealer (jobs). He contracts with a mechanic to keep his jet in good repair (jobs). He contracts with a cleaning company to keep his jet clean inside and out (jobs). He keeps his jet at a local hanger and buys fuel there (jobs). He uses his jet for business and grows his business (jobs). Etc. Etc. And of course he pays all kinds of taxes - even with the ability to accelerate depreciation.

    Now that same small business owner with a tax credit to hire an employee. First, he has not been dreaming of hiring an employee. He actually dreams of not doing that. A new employee who may sue him for his poor taste in jokes. A new employee who may want paid time off after he marries his boy friend and they try to adopt a child from China. A new employee that may force him into paying for or paying a fee for healthcare insurance. An employee who may be a screw-up that he can fire on the advice of his lawyer. Etc. Etc. So, he decides not to hire a new employee. In fact he decides to sell his business, Mitt Romney's old firm makes a bid and plans on eliminating half of the current work force.

    I wonder which would have the desired impact on job creation? Not that anyone in Washington really cares, or understands how regular people think.
    --- merged: Sep 15, 2011 3:46 PM ---
    We have always had partisan conflicts in Congress and we will in the future. Obama has no real conviction on any issue, from my point of view. You could give me the most left leaning person in Washington, with conviction, like a Dennis Kucinich, and with him I would have more confidence in Washington. With Kucinich we would know what to expect from him. He has no hidden agenda. There would be no double speak. There would be no say one thing to one group and say another thing to another group.

    I am shocked that no Democrat is willing to give Obama a primary challenge! What is wrong with the people in the party?
     
  9. redux

    redux Very Tilted

    Location:
    Foggy Bottom
    I went directly to the bill. There is no provision to tax top wage earners health benefits.

    As to the rest, since you dismiss anyone in Washington knowing or caring about how "regular poeple" think, there is no point in further discussion.

    Other than to repeat...I think you are an ideologue, who will ignore or dismiss any position counter to yours, not an idiot.
     
  10. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    The bill as written is not going to pass anyway. Perhaps if it even gets introduced, I will read it.

    If they cared, they would try to understand - which they don't do. Washington seems to corrupt the minds of those who go there.

    People are motivated by their dreams. People do not dream about tax cuts or the rich getting richer at the expense of everyone else. I dare suggest that this simple point is lost on you too.

    You use the word "ignore" when it does not apply. The fact of the matter is that I actually read, listen, research, consider, discuss, question many of the views of those who I disagree with. If I plan on ignoring something, I will acknowledge it. For example, I am not going to read Obama's actual jobs bill until I think it has a chance of passage or even gets formally introduced in Congress - until then I will simply read the summations of others. And, like I wrote above, i am reading information that conflicts with what you have stated.
     
  11. roachboy

    roachboy Very Tilted

  12. redux

    redux Very Tilted

    Location:
    Foggy Bottom
    Same old ace, you wont read the act, but you will dismiss the tax incentives as "loopholes" when they are not (they are small business incentives to hire and middle class cuts to put more money in their pockets) and mischaracterize the .offsets.

    But since you are evidently not interested in looking to the source, I'll post the relevant sections for you:

    OFFSETS
    Subtitle A – 28 Percent Limitation on Certain Deductions and Exclusions​
    Sec. 401. 28 Percent Limitation on Certain Deductions and Exclusion
    Subtitle B – Tax Carried Interest in Investment Partnerships as Ordinary Income​
    Sec. 411. Partnership Interests Transferred In Connection With Performance of Services
    Subtitle C – Close Loophole for Corporate Jet Depreciation​
    Sec. 421. General Aviation Aircraft Treated As 7-Year Property
    Subtitle D -- Repeal Oil Subsidies​
    Sec. 431. Repeal of Deduction for Intangible Drilling and Development Costs in the Case of Oil and Gas Wells
    Sec. 432. Repeal of Deduction for Tertiary InjectantsSec. 433. Repeal of Percentage Depletion for Oil And Gas Wells
    Sec. 434. Section 199 Deduction Not Allowed With Respect to Oil, Natural Gas, or Primary Products Thereof
    Sec. 435. Repeal Oil and Gas Working Interest Exception to Passive Activity Rules
    Sec.436. Uniform Seven-Year Amortization for Geological and Geophysical Expenditures
    Sec.437. Repeal Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit
    Sec.438. Repeal Marginal Well Production Credit
    Subtitle E -- Dual Capacity Taxpayers​
    Sec. 441. Modifications of Foreign Tax Credit Rules Applicable to Dual Capacity Taxpayers
    Sec. 442. Separate Basket Treatment Taxes Paid on Foreign Oil and Gas Income
    Subtitle F – Increased Target and Trigger for Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction​
    Sec. 451. Increased Target and Trigger for Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction

    The tone in the OP was smug and dismissive and a mischaracterization of both the tax incentives and the offsets and you went downhill from there with the knowing more about "regular people" comment.

    BTW, in nearly every poll in the last 6-9 months, the "regular people" want the Bush tax cuts on the top wage earners rolled back to 2000 rates and the oil subsidies repealed.

    You want to openly and honestly discuss the bill, try being more open and honest. :)
     
  13. Ace.... your argument against the hiring tax credit is that small business owners want to fly instead of growing their business? You're not even trying to be sensible.
     
  14. Derwood

    Derwood Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    For nearly 3 years, Ace has bitched about Obama being anti-small business, and now that Obama is throwing some breaks his way.......he's bitching about it
     
  15. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    I'm not sure what Aceventura would like to see in the bill regarding credit and loans. Should the government get in the business of loaning money to small businesses? How much should be allocated? Should the government legislate a loans and credit mandate for the major banks? Should they help fund these to mitigate the risks? What should be done?

    Also, what should be done about the Republicans—and especially the Tea Partiers—who will cry SOCIALISM! in response to any or all of this and will castigate the administration for meddling in the affairs of banks or, worse, getting into the banking business. Big government, bad!

    Or maybe, Ace, you have another solution to the credit crunch. What should government do, just "get out of the way" and the credit will magically flow again to these small businesses? What are the options?
     
  16. There's a government resource in place, Baraka_Guru, http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/loans-grants/small-business-loans/sbas-role . How effective it is or is allowed to be is a point of contention. How applications are appraised can be influenced by political agendas. Loosening the purse strings (being more liberal) and backing more loans can spur small business growth, but increases the risk that the government may have to pay off if businesses don't pan out. Taking a more conservative approach lessens government risk, but reduces the amount of credit available for small businesses.
     
  17. dippin Getting Tilted

    I have an even simpler question:
    when are tax cuts "spending" and when are they "letting the people keep more of what they earn?"
     
  18. They are the former when they benefit you, the latter when they benefit me.
     
  19. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Location:
    Toronto
    Of course, as is usually the case in American politics, discourse will descend into bipartisanism.

    You have the Democratic tax-and-spend position of the centre.
    You have the Republican tax-cut-and-spend position of the right.

    However, what's different now is that you also have the undue influence of the Tea Party, with their quasi- or pick-and-choose libertarianism on the right. To them, the idea of a jobs bill is incredibly easy: cut taxes, deregulate, and balance the budget regardless of revenues and economic situation (domestically or globally). Not even the much-vaunted Reagan was herculean enough to accomplish that.

    Therefore, it is obvious that just about any jobs bill will be a non-starter for anyone on the right. It's difficult to pass balanced measures to reactionaries with too much influence and power, especially populists who sell economic freedom piggybacking on social subjugation.
     
  20. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    Location:
    North Carolina
    The President gave speeches on the bill before he even presented it. Is your position that no person could discuss what he was proposing based on what he was saying in public?

    Is it?

    Did you read my comment. The bill is not going to pass anyway. Has it even been introduced in Congress yet? Who is sponsoring the bill? Or, this all political theater?
    --- merged: Sep 19, 2011 3:27 PM ---
    How do you define loophole?

    Actually it is very frustrating dealing with people who don't get it and won't put in any effort to understand. If Obama wants to create jobs, if you are interested in job creation try to look at the big issues, the issues that will actually make a difference. I will give you a clue, credit availability and some type of clarity from Washington. Address those two issues and economic growth will take off.

    Also, if you don't get the fact that people with the capability to create jobs will do so based on a fundamentally simple concept. A focus on solutions targeting that fundamentally simple concept will make a positive difference, a pretense that it does not matter will make things worse.