Hi 16° | Lo -9°

Letter: Wanted: a grand bargain

President Obama is out making speeches saying he wants to narrow the gap between the middle-income Americans and high-income earners. That sounds good on the stump. However, what middle- and lower-income Americans need is a president who leads, not a perennial campaigner.

The policies of the Democrats are designed to keep most workers broke because there are fewer full-time jobs now than ever before. Of the 1.1 million jobs created last year, 175,000 were full-time jobs and the rest were part-time. Between Obamacare and the regulations being promulgated daily by the federal government, we are creating disincentives for businesses to create full time jobs.

The president needs to work with Congress to pass a grand economic bargain, not pick one part or another. There are four parts to this bargain: reduce expenditures in a meaningful way, reform the tax system, review and stop regulations that retard job creation, and reform the Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security systems.

If we do these things, we will create a feeling of certainty for the private sector which will then create more good paying full-time jobs.

Mr. President, please get off the campaign trail and stay in Washington and negotiate a grand bargain if you really want to have working Americans get full-time jobs and earn more money.



Legacy Comments17

There should not be any talk of a "grand bargain". What about just coming together to agree on getting the economy moving again and just managing the day to day government instead of an ideological agenda.

a grand bargain would require the democrats to actually compromise on their constant obstruction

" lower taxes and regulkations on Business has never produced jobs"...except of course when democrat President JFK did it.

When JFK came into office, the top marginal rate was 91%. He lowered it to 70%. That rate is now 39.6%. In 1963 when JFK was assassinated, income tax represented 17.8% of GDP. In 1989, when Saint Ronnie left office in 1989, it was 18.4%. In 2012 it was 15.8%. Do you fail to see a distinction? Is there perhaps just a teeny-tiny flaw in your argument?

we all know a democrat only wants to tax the producers more - and that is why 47% don't pay taxes

47% not paying taxes is a lie. I would explain what the facts are, but I'm afraid the exercise would be too much like the quip about putting lipstick on a pig.

To gracchus below, the 47% pay withholding taxes but little if any "income taxes". Withholding taxes are your retirement and your medicare, do you want them to have a free ride while those who produce pay their way? When does hard work become over penalized? When does being able to produce more than your neighbor who is on for a free ride, become something to be proud of and to celebrate? We all pay taxes but when 47% pay nothing and people earning twice what those people earn pay it all it is regressive.

To Itsa, below: Regressive? You had better recheck your dictionary. As to what you incorrectly call "withholding" but what is actually Payroll Tax, it really is regressive since low & medium wage workers pay a larger percent of their earnings than do high earners.

Yes, gracchus that is withholding tax or payroll tax, it does not matter, it is reinvested in that persons retirement through social security and Medicare. Now, they pay virtually NO income tax per se and to honest, they ought to pay their share. Withholding taxes or payroll taxes are not income taxes. 47% of the population collects a check funded by those who work the hardest and have applied themselves in life the most. Marx wrote: "to those according to their need; from those according to their ability". I guess in the progressive mind we have arrived at the Marxist Utopia. Americans have become dumbed down and lazy. They vote for the freebies, not for prosperity which could be created by their labor. We are truly regressing as a country and a people.

Outstanding letter Joe. Obama is not a president he is a campaigner. He is a humongous failure has zero knowledge of how to govern reasonably. Everything is a game for him. You watch he is going to drag his feet and threaten to shut the government right around Christmas. He does it year after year.

Regulations raise costs. Those costs are passed on to the consumer. When goods and services cost more, people buy less and use less services.

Rabbit, your statement is only true in a static analysis in which employment and wages do not rise. Since the late 1970's / early 1980's there has been a consciously imposed set of policies intended to depress wages and employment. To reward corporations for eliminating jobs and reducing or eliminating benefits is not a long-term sustainable course. To do it for over 30 years is downright suicidal, and to blame the results on oppressive taxes and regulations is pure head-in-sand nonsense.

Lesson from EC102 - introductory microeconomics: The following statement is at best only true in small part: "If we do these things, we will create a feeling of certainty for the private sector which will then create more good paying full-time jobs." The bigger truth is that companies hire more employees based on how much they will or expect to sell to their customers. If one removed all the (Republican word here) "burdensome" regulations and customers were to buy no more than at present, not a single new worker will be hired. On the other hand, if one reverses the premise - leave all current regulations in place and have a boom in purchasing - employment will rise. The two things you can bet your next paycheck on (assuming you're fortunate to have a job): 1) Removing regulations and/or lowering taxes will have minimal influence on employment. 2) Conservatives and libertarians will never accept this simple truth.

Your Right. lower taxes and regulkations on Business has never produced jobs. It takes demand to produce jobs. We would be better off lowering taxes on the middle class so that they have the money to puchase the goods and services of corporations. Increased demand will then result in more jobs being created and larger profits for the corporations. The Republican mantra of lower taxes for business will create jobs is a fairy tale at best as it has never produced results. any results attributed to that came from the cuts to the middle class's taxes.

Demand used to produce American jobs, just look at iPhones, iPads and cell phones in general. Plenty of demand, but since we make none of them not many jobs. We have to start making something in order for demand to fuel the job market. As long as a maximized profit is the only thing important, we will have to come up with a new way to drive job creation.

Yes, true; or we could try another analysis altogether. Have you ever thought about accepting that the economy as it is structured can't create jobs for all workers and that we ought to look at ways to have people constructively unemployed? Encouraging stay at home parenting is just one ready example.

Or, we can get rid of the stupid regulations, become energy independent (see North Dakota where things are booming and even Wal-Mart is paying $20 per hour for cashiers) and stop deficit spending.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.