Where are the jobs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
Superfreak said:
Probably because you stated "AFTER the Bush tax cuts from 2001 were passed..."The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001", passed June 7, 2001, unemployment went UP!"

How ever could I have thought you were trying to tie the two together?



Lower taxes is a stimulus effort that does indeed tend to create jobs. The unemployment rate did trend down after the second set of cuts. We remained at full employment until the financial crisis reared up. That said, tax cuts only work LONG term if there are corresponding spending cuts. Without them you end up with increased deficit spending. A point I have reiterated time and again on this site. So you can take YOUR partisan bullshit and shove it up your ass.



Again... you clearly were trying to tie the tax cuts to the increases in unemployment, otherwise what was your point of posting.... ".BUT IF LOW TAXES CREATE JOBS, THEN WHY DID UNEMPLOYMENT GO UP?"

Unemployment did NOT go up due to the tax cuts. PERIOD. It went up in 2001 due to 9/11. It went DOWN after the 2003 tax cuts.
Click to expand...

We also had a recession in 2001. The dot com bubble burst and many jobs were loss. And yes we had 9/11 as well. Neither of those two things were particularly good for the economy.
 
According to a report by the Center for American Progress, "from March 2001 to December 2007 the economy added 1.8 million jobs for workers aged 25 to 54, only 22,000 per month. That translates to an average annualized growth rate of only 0.3 percent per month-the slowest of any cycle on record since the end of World War II and one-fifth the growth rate during the 1990s."


http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201011190001
 
Onceler said:
The stimulus was never supposed to restore the unemployment rate to sub-5% levels on its own. I'm not sure where you got that. It was supposed to create jobs & turn the tide, so that the private sector could take over. That hasn't happened yet.

But it's ludicrous for you & Yurt to try to assert that no jobs were created, or that it didn't add jobs in any way. It fell short of targets, but still created hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Click to expand...

It was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%, according to Obama and Biden. It didn't.
It was supposed to create millions of "shovel ready jobs" promised Obama. It didn't.

...Jump start the economy? Ha! Didn't do that either!

It FAILED on every level to do what was promised it would do... Promised, while most of us were telling you, it wouldn't!
 
Zapped in the Brain said:
The next round..."The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003", was passed by the United States Congress on May 23, 2003 and signed into law by President George W. Bush on May 28, 2003, FINALLY started to bring the numbers down from 6.3...however, Bush NEVER SAW NUMBERS AS LOW as he had at the beginning of his first term...BUT IF LOW TAXES CREATE JOBS, THEN WHY DID UNEMPLOYMENT GO UP?
Click to expand...

We've not seen 6.3% unemployment under Obama... that would be a blessing... Liberals would be lauding Obama as the greatest job-creating president of all time, if we could get back to 6.3%.... but Obama has been nowhere near that number, and he won't get anywhere close to it.
 

Bush tax cuts inefficient, didn't stimulate the economy


According to the Tax Policy Center's William Gale:

"Economic research over the past decade can explain why extending the original Bush tax cuts is not good stimulus policy. After the tax rebates in 2001, 2003, and 2008, households appear to have spent in relatively short order somewhere between 25 and 67 cents more for each dollar of tax cut. This makes tax cuts in general - even the parts of those tax bills that were intended to stimulate - a relatively weak way to help the economy compared to increases in government purchases, for which each dollar of increased deficit turns into an additional dollar of spending."


[Tax Policy Center, 9/30/10]



http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/201011190001
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top