Jumpstart the Economy
Barack Obama believes that every American family deserve the opportunity to not just get by, but to get ahead in our economy – to get an education, build a nest egg and provide a better life for their children. As the economy has changed American families are being left on their own to navigate an increasingly complex and challenging economic situation. A successful economy is one that grows and allows American families to achieve their aspirations, like building up wealth, owning a home, or sending a child to college. A strategy for security and success of America’s families has three parts:
1. Get the economy back on track with a $50 billion stimulus. The most immediate challenge to the success of America’s families is the current state of our economy. The economy has shed 438,000 jobs this year, six straight months of job loss, as the housing crisis deepens, energy and food prices soar, and consumer expectations for the future are at the lowest level ever recorded. Barack Obama is calling for a second round of $50 billion in stimulus to jump start the economy which would complement the investments in infrastructure and green jobs that he has proposed as part of his overall economic plan.
2. Provide economic security for all American families. Even before the current economic downturn families were facing increased challenges. Wages have been stagnant for a generation. The typical household has seen its income fall by nearly $1,000 in this economic “expansion.” Health costs have jumped 67 percent in inflation-adjusted terms since 2000, while 8.6 million more Americans have joined the ranks of the uninsured. Millions of families face mounting debt and the prospect of losing their homes. To address these issues Barack Obama is proposing a meaningful tax cut for working families, a plan to cut health costs by $2,500 per family and cover all of the uninsured, protections for consumers suffering from abusive lending practices, and a safety net for the most vulnerable families.
3.Empower American families to achieve success. Barack Obama believes that every American family deserve the opportunity to not just get by, but to get ahead in our economy – to get an education, build a nest egg, own a home and provide a better life for their children. That is why he proposes to make it easier and more rewarding for families to save, own a home, balance work and family, provide a $4,000 tax credit to make college affordable for everyone, and eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-up companies so that Americans can accumulate wealth and succeed.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
The economic ramifications of Obama's economic plan couldn't be more clear. His plan relies on raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 and all businesses and corporations. Most people think they aren't affected by this because they don't make more than $250,000. But, those of us making less than $250,000 are the ones affected more by this. Businesses won't just accept a tax increase leading to a profit reduction. Instead, they will maintain their profits by increasing the costs of the goods and services they provide, cutting salaries of the people who work for them, and cutting jobs within their companies. So, everything we buy (food, fuel, clothes, electronics, etc.) and all the services we utilize will cost us more, way more than the proposed tax break he promises. Also, the extremely wealthy will decide not to buy their yachts and extra mansions, and not to go to the most expensive restaurants. In the end, Obama's plan will lead to less money being put into the economy (leading to fewer sales tax payers), increased unemployment (leading to fewer income tax payers), and an economic depression like we have never seen.
I'm not sure I could handle another hit from big government. A jump start implies the economy is sitting still and the battery is dead, but nothing could be farther from the truth.
We are in the process of navigating SLOWLY around a huge obstacle--worthless sub-prime mortgages bundled in opaque packages called mortgage backed securities. These sub-prime mortgages were mandated by big government "spread the wealth" regulations. Please, Mr. Obama, if you could step to the side of the road and distract 20,000 bureaucrats with with a speech, we'll take care of the economy on our own.
I don't think you have to vote for a candidate just because you are a democrat or a republican. I think you need to use your brain and research the candidates. There is numerous web sites to go to for information and not just to the candidates site. I am a 70 year old female and did just that. I think Senator McCain has the best economy plan. I am a retired policewoman and draw social security. I want that protected. I think Senator McCain can do that for me and all Americans. I also think his experience in government and foreign policy is greater, therefore Senator McCain has my vote.
This idea of the government shifting funds from this to that....
Taking from this and putting it into that...
It's like shifting eggs in a basket. Every step of the way it's taxed, a portion is wasted and the government takes a cut to run... more government.
Lets look at what this Democrat Congress has done:
Bailouts for banks. Bailouts for home lenders. Bailouts for people who took/recieved loans they could not afford because of "Equal Opportunity Lending". Bailouts for Bear Sterns. Bailouts for people who built thier houses under sea level with no insurance. Bailouts for telecoms who commited crimes aginst my constitutional rights (for which Barack Hussein Obama voted for). Now they want to put us hard-working tax payers who are responsible and pay our bills to be on the hook for those who took money they could not pay back, in the context of going after "Predatory Lenders" who gave THIER money to people with lousy credit under the guidance of THIS government.
Neither one of them desirves to be President. Because they are both congressmen and congress is the problem.
It is time to form a new government.
Only way to get the greed out of Washington D.C.
that can't be trusted with our economic future. We've had 19 years of Republican administrations to show us firsthand that "trickle down" just destroys the economy by eliminating the buying potential of people in the lower brackets of the economy. Why was the economy so robust during Clinton's administration? Because lower income folks didn't feel on the verge of financial destitution at every turn. Throw in corporate greed combined with complete lack of government oversight and it's clear that "the Rich Get Richer" is a doomed strategy for long-term economic health.
Economies that have a strong base that can afford to spend money can afford to nurture wider and more tiers above the lowest levels. Is a pyramid that's a mile high by a foot wide at its base going to stand for long? Or is a better stability model a pyramid that's a mile wide by a foot high?
No question. Trickle Up is far more sensible.
Good try veetwo. Over the last 19 years, between the THREE branches of government, we have experineced an even balance of democratic and republican influence, so trying to pin our problems on republicans is disingenuous at best! If we extend our analysis to thirty years, we see the greatest contrast between Jimmy Carter's "spread the wealth" plan in cooperation with his tax and spend congress, and Ronald Reagan's "get government off our backs" plan in spite of a liberal congress. I still remember the misery of the first plan and the relief of the latter.
Cutting slices off of one person's big piece of pie to "spread the wealth around" just makes more crums, and don't forget the bureaucrats eat most of the slices they cut off, so very littel actually gets "spread around." Can you name one pie slicing program that ever made someone rich (other than a politician that is)? Social Security? We pay 15% a year for 50 years and get poverty benefits for 5, but it's going bankrupt! Welfare? The choice of inner city baby mills or abortion! Education? The more they spend the worse it gets!
Barry experimented with his "spread the wealth around" philosophy in Chicago. The folks on the South Side are as poor as ever. Barry and his frineds are filthy rich (but some of them will have to wait until they get out of jail to spend it all), and the political machine is bigger than ever. Is he coming to Washington to find more wealth to spread around in Chicago or to impose that failed plan on the rest of the nation?
If everyone wants a bigger piece of pie, and we all do, the only way to do that is to bake more pies. The private citizens of America are the most industious, igenious, and generous people on the planet. Most of them love to bake pies, and they even enjoy sharing the pie--unless some big government regulator is taking it by force. If we keep more money in the hands of entrepreneurs, and less in bloated bureaucracies we'll bake more pies than we can eat. Besides "trickle-up" is a defective metaphore!
We surely had lack of oversight, and that should be punished, but the regulations are on the books. The corruption of personal greed within government is just another reason to keep government small. If greed has eight sharp teeth, then corrupt governemtn has 32! By the way Barry would have had plenty of opportunity to pull some corrupt government teeth while he was in Chicago; does he have any trophies?
First, I dont think that the government can make better investment decisions than the free market. Government institutions dont have same incentives and disincentives as the free market institution. Experience proves over and over again, that when governments do something, they do it with a lower quality and a higher price, than private institutions. Furthermore, every government intervention in the marketplace distorts its even more, and makes problems in the long run worse.
Government spending and market intervention is part of the problem, not its solution! Every reputable economist knows that.
From where does the government gets its money in the first place? In a consumer driven economy, every tax is paid in the end by the consumer. Stealing money to spend it supposedly better, is wrong.
2 Is it really a sane idea to destroy the rewards and punishments of the market, by punishing highly successful people with higher taxes, and rewarding highly unsuccessful with a "safety net?
Amen!
The American and global economies are so immensely complicated we lose sight of the person and the family. We must recognize that the economy needs jumpstarts-- exactly as said in this Argument --but the ordinary jumpstart gets an engine running and one jumpstart is enough. Not so with the national economy or a family's economic security.
We must have continuous follow up to make sure the cycle of "investment, job, pay, output, sales, consumption, profit, investment", has begun and is running smooth enough for the results we're after.
Too many Educated People believe the cycle is private and automatic. And for some it is.
But for nations and the planet the cycle needs a SYSTEM of continuous jumpstarts whenever the engine quits.
Too many EP's believe we needs high taxes. We don't. We need MONEY-- to be saved until output is affordable for the pay received. Keynes' general theory of money must be simplified and pounded in, in argument.