another 80b down the toilet ?

[dogtowner]

can't they just take it from whats left in Porkulus ?

I mean really, its mainly the same old stuff.
its like they have NO interest in helping people back to work, I don't get it. more at the link.

Senate Democrats circulated a jobs bill Tuesday that's light on new initiatives on boosting hiring and heavy with provisions sought by lobbyists for doctors and the satellite broadcasting industry.

The 362-page measure is still in draft form and has not been officially released. It has bipartisan backing but very few new ideas for creating jobs, other than a $10 billion plan to exempt companies from paying the employer's share of Social Security payroll taxes for new hires if they are unemployed and hired this year.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

can't they just take it from whats left in Porkulus ?

I mean really, its mainly the same old stuff.
its like they have NO interest in helping people back to work, I don't get it. more at the link.

"The jobs bill is politically important for Democrats seeking to respond to public anxiety about the economy. But the measure also has a lot of pull with an assortment of lobbying groups seeking to extend a raft of tax breaks and other benefits that expire at the end of the month.

Instead, the cornerstone of the plan would exempt companies from paying the employer's share of Social Security payroll taxes for new hires — as long as those people had been unemployed at least 60 days.

A recent Congressional Budget Office report estimates that the idea could create up to 18 jobs per $1 million in tax relief, a more efficient way to boost hiring than provisions in last year's $862 billion economic stimulus bill. The $10 billion plan could create perhaps 50,000 to 90,000 jobs through September and another 80,000 to 180,000 jobs next year."

...Soooooooooooo, your big-issue is tax-cuts....or, job-creation???

​

 

[asur]

It's sounds like total garbage and unlikely to create any real jobs.

People need jobs in the US not crap!

 

[dogtowner]

...Soooooooooooo, your big-issue is tax-cuts....or, job-creation???

​

you canot bribe companies into hiring people. this tax cut will only go to those who were hiring anyway just like cash for clunkers only went to those who were going to buy anyway.

 

[dogtowner]

It's sounds like total garbage and unlikely to create any real jobs.

People need jobs in the US not crap!

its just porkulus junior.

isn't it silly to thik you can do the same thing and expect a different result ? no new money for that crap.

 

[always]

can't they just take it from whats left in Porkulus ?

I mean really, its mainly the same old stuff.
its like they have NO interest in helping people back to work, I don't get it. more at the link.

Boy!! that makes since reduce needed S.S. funds needed badly for S.S. payments- Going Broke FAST!- this dumb thinking will expedite matters
How Dumb are these politicians?

 

[always]

its just porkulus junior.

isn't it silly to thik you can do the same thing and expect a different result ? no new money for that crap.

Just a Replay of FAILURES!!

 

[dogtowner]

Boy!! that makes since reduce needed S.S. funds needed badly for S.S. payments- Going Broke FAST!- this dumb thinking will expedite matters
How Dumb are these politicians?

I shudder to know that we're just beginning to plumb that depth.

Heaven help us.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

you canot bribe companies into hiring people. this tax cut will only go to those who were hiring anyway just like cash for clunkers only went to those who were going to buy anyway.

So, your big-issue is economic-incentive$ for employers to hire....now?

​

 

[dogtowner]

So, your big-issue is economic-incentive$ for employers to hire....now?

​

employers hire when their demand requires it, not because they get a temporary break on 8% or whatever it is these days of salary.

my big issue is that none of the administration's spending helped the first time, why would it now ?

do something DIFFERENT, something that is KNOWN to work.

 

[dahermit]

employers hire when their demand requires it, not because they get a temporary break on 8% or whatever it is these days of salary.

Do you have some link to data that indicates that is true, or in the least are you an employer? Or, what is your opinion based on?

 

[dogtowner]

Do you have some link to data that indicates that is true, or in the least are you an employer? Or, what is your opinion based on?

you serious ?

yes, you should see the justification required of us for a new hire.

and thats in a large company that has greater flexibility to hire.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

employers hire when their demand requires it, not because they get a temporary break on 8% or whatever it is these days of salary.

...So...somehow...it'd be less-expensive, for an employer to train a new-employee on his own "dime", rather-than do so with a ca$h-incentive paying for that training????

my big issue is that none of the administration's spending helped the first time, why would it now ?

You're (of course) referring to the check$ with Obama's signature.

Once that (same) cash was re-issued....with Republicans' names on those check$...there certainly was cause for celebration, THEN!!!

do something DIFFERENT, something that is KNOWN to work.

Well.....we surely-do know that something won't be TAX-CUTS!

We tried that....for EIGHT YEARS!!! (...Ignoring that same tactic 1980-thru-1991, of course.)

​

 

[dogtowner]

​

...So...somehow...it'd be less-expensive, for an employer to train a new-employee on his own "dime", rather-than do so with a ca$h-incentive paying for that training????

​

You're (of course) referring to the check$ with Obama's signature.

Once that (same) cash was re-issued....with Republicans' names on those check$...there certainly was cause for celebration, THEN!!!


Well.....we surely-do know that something won't be TAX-CUTS!

We tried that....for EIGHT YEARS!!! (...Ignoring that same tactic 1980-thru-1991, of course.)

​

you only need to train if you have a need to hire. you cannot bribe people to hire.

rebate checks havenever worked for anyone.

If you dont care for GOP solutions, try JFK's
​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

you serious ?

yes, you should see the justification required of us for a new hire.

....Like covering the expense o' health-care, right?

Yeah.....we certainly wouldn't want to minimize that expense, for employers, right?


​

"Initially, the public option would be offered to Americans who lack employer-provided insurance and don’t qualify for Medicare or Medicaid, as well as to employees of businesses with fewer than 25 workers. Under the House bill, in 2014, the public option would be made available to businesses with as many as 50 employees, and in 2015, to businesses with up to 100 employees. After that, it could be opened up to all businesseshttp://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic...ic-option-everything-you-need-to-know/364824/, subject to the decision of a new Health Choices Commissioner. The CBO anticipates that about 6 million citizens would be covered by the public option in 2019, and that 24 million additional Americans would opt for private companies’ offerings in the new Health Insurance Exchange."