jobs VS deficit

[Schadenfreude]

which do you consider more important

funding jobs or reducing the deficit - assuming that you can have one or the other

i vote for jobs since more jobs will help reduce the deficit - assuming that increased spending does not occur

 

[Based Chad]

If we grow the actual real economy and create jobs through protectionism, the deficit will be resolved by normal tax rates. It's because our real economy is actually imploding due to globalization stupidity that our government is failing too.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

which do you consider more important

funding jobs or reducing the deficit - assuming that you can have one or the other

i vote for jobs since more jobs will help reduce the deficit - assuming that increased spending does not occur

It is not an either or situation. We can reduce the deficit and spark job growth at the same time.

Also... 'assuming increased spending does not occur'???? LMAO... it has increased every years since 1965. They need to cut back at a minimum to 2007 spending levels.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

If we grow the actual real economy and create jobs through protectionism, the deficit will be resolved by normal tax rates. It's because our real economy is actually imploding due to globalization stupidity that our government is failing too.

Protectionism does NOT create jobs. It KILLS them.

 

[Based Chad]

Protectionism does NOT create jobs. It KILLS them.

No. It creates them domestically, instead of incentivizing outsourcing and overseas production. Everybody knows thats what protectionism does. That's why you globalist zealots hate it. Damocles agrees with me.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

No. It creates them domestically, instead of incentivizing outsourcing and overseas production. Everybody knows thats what protectionism does. That's why you globalist zealots hate it. Damocles agrees with me.

Study the Great Depression. We TRIED protectionism. Smoot Hawley raised tariffs on thousands of goods in an attempt to protect American business from foreign competition. What was the result? Everyone else raised tariffs on our products to make them LESS competitive overseas. This was in 1930... right after the market crashed. It was a knee-jerk reaction that had the intent of 'saving American jobs'. Instead it deepened the Great Depression. Other countries saw similar results.

Protectionism is a moronic solution only advocated by those whose mindsets limit their ability to think beyond country borders.

We 'incentivize' outsourcing by having one of the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world. We 'incentivize' outsourcing by creating endless bureaucracy in DC and at the state level.

I don't care who agrees with you. Protectionism is a stupid idea. It failed miserably the last time it was implemented.

 

[Based Chad]

Study the Great Depression. We TRIED protectionism. Smoot Hawley raised tariffs on thousands of goods in an attempt to protect American business from foreign competition. What was the result? Everyone else raised tariffs on our products to make them LESS competitive overseas. This was in 1930... right after the market crashed. It was a knee-jerk reaction that had the intent of 'saving American jobs'. Instead it deepened the Great Depression. Other countries saw similar results.

Protectionism is a moronic solution only advocated by those whose mindsets limit their ability to think beyond country borders.

We 'incentivize' outsourcing by having one of the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world. We 'incentivize' outsourcing by creating endless bureaucracy in DC and at the state level.

I don't care who agrees with you. Protectionism is a stupid idea. It failed miserably the last time it was implemented.

Your historical revisionism is not convincing here. The great depression was caused by the dust bowl and buying on margin in the stock market.

I agree with cutting taxes, but that's not sufficient anymore.

Our trade deficit was not nearly as out of whack at any point in the past than it is now.

your globalist zealotry is leading to collapsing economies all around the world.

Protectionism is definitely the answer here. That's why globalists like you get so desperate and bent out of shape about it.

 

[NOVA]

which do you consider more important

funding jobs or reducing the deficit - assuming that you can have one or the other

i vote for jobs since more jobs will help reduce the deficit - assuming that increased spending does not occur

The government should NOT be the major employer in the country....thats exactly what is wrong, government is too, too big....
Governments job is defending the country and legislating good, sound, laws and regulations that enable the citizens and private enterprise to prosper....

Never spending more than it takes in except in emergency situations like un-avoidable war to protect us from those that wish us harm.

 

[Based Chad]

Governments job is defending the country and legislating good, sound, laws and regulations that enable the citizens and private enterprise to prosper....

Which is why we need protectionism trade policy. Setting trade policy is firmly within the federal governments purview.

Allowing politicially oppressed slave labor into the international labor pool will lead to the elimination of all freedom globally. We should boycott evil, not incentivize it with our trade dollars.

We will need government to feed us until the corporations decide to stop being globalist fuckfaces.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Your historical revisionism is not convincing here. The great depression was caused by the dust bowl and buying on margin in the stock market.

I did not state that Smoot Hawley CAUSED the great depression. I stated that it DEEPENED the Great Depression. If you don't understand that point, then you are a hopeless cause.

I agree with cutting taxes, but that's not sufficient anymore.

Ridiculous. Corporations are pieces of paper. Paper owned by individuals. Corporate taxes are double taxation. That corporate tax gets passed on to consumers... who not only pay taxes on their income, but then again on sales tax and then again with this hidden tax.

Drop the corporate rate to zero. Tax individuals at the same rate on all sources of income. Either those individual owners of the corporation will be taxed on dividends/cap gains or the money will go to the employees who will pay taxes. The rest would go into the growth of the company in the form of new jobs/expanding facilities etc...

Our trade deficit was not nearly as out of whack at any point in the past than it is now.

your globalist zealotry is leading to collapsing economies all around the world.

lol... tell us.... which economies are collapsing due to globalization?

Protectionism is definitely the answer here. That's why globalists like you get so desperate and bent out of shape about it.

lol... I am not the one getting bent out of shape. I have shown you the example of what protectionism does, you just ignore it.

 

[Based Chad]

I did not state that Smoot Hawley CAUSED the great depression. I stated that it DEEPENED the Great Depression. If you don't understand that point, then you are a hopeless cause.



Ridiculous. Corporations are pieces of paper. Paper owned by individuals. Corporate taxes are double taxation. That corporate tax gets passed on to consumers... who not only pay taxes on their income, but then again on sales tax and then again with this hidden tax.

Drop the corporate rate to zero. Tax individuals at the same rate on all sources of income. Either those individual owners of the corporation will be taxed on dividends/cap gains or the money will go to the employees who will pay taxes. The rest would go into the growth of the company in the form of new jobs/expanding facilities etc...



lol... tell us.... which economies are collapsing due to globalization?



lol... I am not the one getting bent out of shape. I have shown you the example of what protectionism does, you just ignore it.

Our economy is collapsing due to globalization.

And again, your revisionism about protectionism does not dispute the stellar logic of it. It's exactly what we need, and why you are bent out of shape, typing more and more to say less and less.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Our economy is collapsing due to globalization.

And again, your revisionism about protectionism does not dispute the stellar logic of it. It's exactly what we need, and why you are bent out of shape, typing more and more to say less and less.

Again.... show me where I am 'revising' history. Do you believe Smoot Hawley didn't happen? Do you have evidence from economists showing that Smoot Hawley didn't prolong the depression?

Take a look at our trade deficits...

1) in periods of strong economic growth... the trade deficits increase

2) in periods of recession.... the trade deficits contract

 

[Based Chad]

Again.... show me where I am 'revising' history. Do you believe Smoot Hawley didn't happen? Do you have evidence from economists showing that Smoot Hawley didn't prolong the depression?

Take a look at our trade deficits...

1) in periods of strong economic growth... the trade deficits increase

2) in periods of recession.... the trade deficits contract

But the trade deficits were never in the magnitude they are now.

All of your historical arguments are invalid for this reason.

Are you saying globalization isn't destroying our economy? It's provable that it is. If companies actually employed americans instead of seeking foreign slaves we would be doing just fine. These are the facts as they are now. Your historical analysis is invalid. Why are we in the shitter with this trade deficit, if your simplistic analysis is valid?

 

[NOVA]

Unless you're living 80 years in the past, no one with any understanding of world economics supports protectionism.....though it may actually be beneficial in some other countries, it would be the death of what little is left of US manufacturing....there is no need to elaborate.....
Its time to realize, "they" don't need us as much as "we" need them.....
Like it or not, we've become a world economy, much to our detriment....
The US no longer makes the "best" of anything except for military goods...and their just ain't much of a big market for that....

 

[Based Chad]

Unless you're living 80 years in the past, no one with any understanding of world economics supports protectionism.....though it may actually be beneficial in some other countries, it would be the death of what little is left of US manufacturing....there is no need to elaborate.....
Its time to realize, "they" don't need us as much as "we" need them.....
Like it or not, we've become a world economy, much to our detriment....
The US no longer makes the "best" of anything except for military goods...and their just ain't much of a big market for that....

LOL. Your hysteria is charming. Protectionism incentivizes local production because foreign goods become more expensive.

You're such a globalist brainwash victim. We don't need "them". LOL.

You do actually need to elaborate.

 

[Based Chad]

Bravo is addicted to my jizz in his face.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

But the trade deficits were never in the magnitude they are now.

All of your historical arguments are invalid for this reason.

and OUR GDP vs. the rest of the world was also not of the same magnitude.

The trade deficit is also a result of our savings rate as a country. Which has nothing to do with globalization.

Are you saying globalization isn't destroying our economy? It's provable that it is. If companies actually employed americans instead of seeking foreign slaves we would be doing just fine. These are the facts as they are now. Your historical analysis is invalid. Why are we in the shitter with this trade deficit, if your simplistic analysis is valid?

Yes, I am saying globalization isn't destroying our economy. You just want to look at one aspect of globalization (some jobs going overseas) and pretend that there are not any benefits. You pretend that people are paid 'slave wages' because they are not paid the same as what they would if the jobs were in the US. That ignores the differences in cost of living.

These jobs that have gone overseas have helped boost the middle class numbers in countries like China, India, Indonesia etc... As that middle class grows, so to has their consumption.

The lower costs of labor also allow you and I and every other American to buy the goods at lower costs. If you bring the manufacturing back here and we all have to pay higher costs for goods... how are we better off?

We are in this trade deficit because we do not save as much as other countries, because we spend more, because we are the largest economy in the world... by far. As I stated, when we have an economic boom, the trade deficit likewise booms. When we have a contraction, the trade deficit falls.

 

[Based Chad]

and OUR GDP vs. the rest of the world was also not of the same magnitude.

Irrelevant.

The trade deficit is also a result of our savings rate as a country. Which has nothing to do with globalization.

The trade deficit IS A direct result of globalist thinking and policy. Globalist propaganda also had an impact on our savings rate. Maybe that's what your thinking of.

Yes, I am saying globalization isn't destroying our economy.

Now you're just invalidating yourself completely. Outsourcing and foreign production are precisely why we have a jobs problems.

You just want to look at one aspect of globalization (some jobs going overseas) and pretend that there are not any benefits. You pretend that people are paid 'slave wages' because they are not paid the same as what they would if the jobs were in the US. That ignores the differences in cost of living.

The benefit of cheaps goods means nothing when people are out of work. No matter how cheap goods get, you cant afford them when you have no job. The difference in the cost of living is another fascist manipulation. AMericans are being gouged by multinationals for all goods.

These jobs that have gone overseas have helped boost the middle class numbers in countries like China, India, Indonesia etc... As that middle class grows, so to has their consumption.

You should care more about maintaining the middle class here. That would be the patriotic view. You take the traitor view. And their consumption is not increasing commensurately, because they're fascist totalitarian slave masters won't allow it.

The lower costs of labor also allow you and I and every other American to buy the goods at lower costs. If you bring the manufacturing back here and we all have to pay higher costs for goods... how are we better off?

Like I said, no matter how cheap things get, you cant afford them without a job. We are better off because more people will have jobs.

We are in this trade deficit because we do not save as much as other countries, because we spend more, because we are the largest economy in the world... by far. As I stated, when we have an economic boom, the trade deficit likewise booms. When we have a contraction, the trade deficit falls.

Bullshit. The trade deficit itself exists due to globalization zealotry and a globalist consipacy to subjugate the world under internationalist fascism. The trade deficit my very well be falling soon, due to pubic outrage at globalization zealotry traitorism in our leadership.


Don't look now, but you're coated in my man goo.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Irrelevant.

LMAO.... so you think comparing our trade deficit to 40 or 60 years ago is relevant, but comparing the US/World GDP for the same time frames is not?

The trade deficit IS A direct result of globalist thinking and policy. Globalist propaganda also had an impact on our savings rate. Maybe that's what your thinking of.

No, it is not. How does globalism impact our savings rate??? Do explain.

Now you're just invalidating yourself completely. Outsourcing and foreign production are precisely why we have a jobs problems.

Again, you are incorrect. It obviously has a negative impact on certain industries in the US, but do explain how it is we maintained historically low unemployment rates throughout the 1990's through 2008 if globalization creates a 'jobs problem'

The benefit of cheaps goods means nothing when people are out of work. No matter how cheap goods get, you cant afford them when you have no job. The difference in the cost of living is another fascist manipulation. AMericans are being gouged by multinationals for all goods.

Really? So those people on welfare and unemployment bene's right now would rather have goods cost more?

No question we pay more for goods than most. That again tends to go hand in hand with the strength of an economy and the scale relative to the global economy.

You should care more about maintaining the middle class here. That would be the patriotic view. You take the traitor view. And their consumption is not increasing commensurately, because they're fascist totalitarian slave masters won't allow it.

So you maintain that the middle class in the US is worse off now than it was in the 60's/70's/80's? They have smaller homes? fewer cars? fewer amenities?

Like I said, no matter how cheap things get, you cant afford them without a job. We are better off because more people will have jobs.

True. without a job it is indeed hard to buy goods. that said, protectionism doesn't create jobs. If you stop jobs from going overseas and foreign countries do the same... who wins?

Bullshit. The trade deficit itself exists due to globalization zealotry and a globalist consipacy to subjugate the world under internationalist fascism. The trade deficit my very well be falling soon, due to pubic outrage at globalization zealotry traitorism in our leadership.

wow... did your panties bunch up on you? talk about being 'bent out of shape'.

You can look up the relationship of the trade deficit to our economic conditions.

 

[Based Chad]

LMAO.... so you think comparing our trade deficit to 40 or 60 years ago is relevant, but comparing the US/World GDP for the same time frames is not?

Trade deficits are expressed as a ratio, and shouldnt be affected by volumetric changes, unless globalist zealotry is taking hold...

No, it is not. How does globalism impact our savings rate??? Do explain.

The accompanying propaganda has told us for years that we can keep buying on credit cards with no consequence.

Again, you are incorrect. It obviously has a negative impact on certain industries in the US, but do explain how it is we maintained historically low unemployment rates throughout the 1990's through 2008 if globalization creates a 'jobs problem'

Jumping from bubble to bubble to lure americans into false sense of security.

Really? So those people on welfare and unemployment bene's right now would rather have goods cost more?

They're rather have jobs.

No question we pay more for goods than most. That again tends to go hand in hand with the strength of an economy and the scale relative to the global economy.

Yes, due to price gouging on the part of corporations.

So you maintain that the middle class in the US is worse off now than it was in the 60's/70's/80's? They have smaller homes? fewer cars? fewer amenities?

Yes. Back then there was an actual future to look forward too. And again, cheap goods mean nothing when you dont have a job.

True. without a job it is indeed hard to buy goods. that said, protectionism doesn't create jobs. If you stop jobs from going overseas and foreign countries do the same... who wins?

it does create jobs. AMericans win.

wow... did your panties bunch up on you? talk about being 'bent out of shape'.

You can look up the relationship of the trade deficit to our economic conditions.

We will probably become more protectionist since the massive trade deficit is a failed policy for most americans.

You're still coated in my man goo.