Jack, to answer your question on why has the House not proposed this since the start of the 112th congress, they did.

The Path to Prosperity had the frame work that the Senate, POTUS and the MSM trashed the whole thing over Medicare.
They did a great job of getting the eye off the ball ( again shiny object over there ). Seems to be the case here, as the information was out there for the reading in April.
Recall Bill Maher's stupidity showing in making comments about how the system worked, even though he did not read the actual bill, he just thought he knew what he was talking about. Evelyn Wood school of speed reading fails again.

Page 53 of the summary starts the outlined the reduction in tax burden to 25% from 35% to help with organic job creation ( and the associated spending cuts so it is not deficit spending ) . This is still higher than Canada's rate target ( Canada is making a corporate safe haven ).

They did, 2009 bill - ARRP ring a bell ?

Thing is this bill basically got union people back to work, paving the roads with money from China. Also restarted the unemployment clock for them.
ARRP was $ 780B in total ( $ 760 B ?? ).

$ 25B of this is what the DOE had to play with, which is where JCI got the joint funding from to open a battery plan in MI.
The current $ 2M / job created at a plant that some how is either going to lower the cost of the battery or recoup the money.

The details of the ROI calc that I put together ( taking what little info on the deal is publicly available )

https://www.f150online.com/forums/po...0-000-job.html


Sorry if this sounds like I am being an jerk to you, that is not the intent.

I get agitated when questions like this come up. I did not expect this question from you, you are generally on top of things.
Bit of short term memory over write with the MSM dumping all sorts of FUD on the population, which is what the MSM and the DNC want, to overload the public so they do not recall these items from the past.

 

Here is a multi-step program that will create many jobs:

1) Repeal Obamacare
2) Reduce Capital Gains taxes
3) Reduce the tax rate on those in the high income brackets (small business owners, basically)
4) Roll back environmental protections and the EPA. Start with the regulations that cost lots of jobs but provide minimal benefit to the environment.
5) Develop cheap sources of domestic energy, like coal and ANWR.
6) Build more oil refineries.
7) Allow construction of state of the art nuclear power plants
8) Lower the minimum wage.

Each of these steps will result in jobs. Too bad one party is strongly opposed to all of them.

 

I like all of those except lowering the minimum wage. The prices of stuff (food, clothing, etc) won't come down, so lowering the wage would just seem to hurt the people that can barely afford it more than help. But that just my opinion, I am sure I will be told I am wrong

 

Steve, no offense taken at all, I've never claimed to be omniscient.

It just seems to my little mind that Congress, during much of the last decade has been very dysfunctional. (And I know, I'm "parroting" another common complaint, aren't I?)

Since I don't pay much attention to the MSM (we don't watch TV) but do listen to the radio and I monitor several internet news sources, and read the newspaper, I don't pick up some of the nuances you do.

What comes across loud and clear to me are charges and countercharges from the Left and Right, and NO results.

I remain somewhat unconvinced regarding the validity of tax cuts, unless there are HUGE cuts in spending. And, the big three that would need to be cut are programs for Health, Defense, and Government Pensions. I don't see how you can be "pro-life" and cut health care. Recipients of Government Pensions would naturally (and rightfully?) see a reduction in benefits as a renege on a promise. That leaves Defense, which seems to be "off the table". (Our beloved Senator Jon Kyle has threatened to quit the "super committee" if there's any talk of Defense cuts - way to go, Sen Kyle.)

I'd like to see the Department of Homeland Security completely dismantled, it seems to me it has wasted billions if not trillions of dollars on programs that could have been performed just as well by other agencies within their existing budgets if there was better inter-agency cooperation.

I can't say much about the battery plant, because the link seems to have been taken down. And, it's not really in our news here in Arizona.

So, that's why I have the opinion I have. And, I've sure I don't know everything I should about the subject.

- Jack

 

I like it. And also add repealing all of our so-called 'free' trade agreements.

To touch on the minimum wage: Raising the minimum wage rate actually causes job losses and increases in prices at places like McDonald's, etc. Raising the minimum wage does nothing but help those that want to hold on to power.

http://mises.org/daily/2130

 

IMO, the minimum wage is for entry level employees that will have little responsibilities in the workplace. This would include high school students and others with limited experience or skills.

It is not designed as a living wage for someone who has a family to support.

 

Problem is - in this city most jobs ARE minimum wage, and people DO have to live off it. That's all Walmart pays almost everyone in the store and people are just glad to even HAVE a job.

 

I think you're absolutely right. I'd add to the "store clerks", others like restaurant workers, paid "careproviders", "farm produce pickers", children's daycare workers, some charter school teachers, etc. It's really a tough call. If you've read my previous posts, I believe the wage disparity between workers in the US and those in "developing countries" is the major reason for job loss, not taxes. But, there's no way for us to "outsource" those in the "service industries", so those jobs stay here and we somehow expect people to live on what they earn from them.

- Jack

 

I did not get that from a claim, it is more so an observation. You generally have your head about you on topics.

Yes they have, but from the 111th congress forward, it seems to have gotten worse. Ever notice how nice Pelozi was in the 110th congress, and the change with the 111th congress.

I do not watch news on TV at all. I have no need for it, it is going to be biased one way or the other.
I take headlines off google news, and go and find out what is going on at the source. I spend quite a bit of time at the CBO web site. Basically build my own article for the topic. This way I can take the WH, CBO and House web sites, and put together what is going on. It also makes me a fact critic at times ( as you can see ), when i have to read through pages of CBO documents, I have a tendency to be able to quote the numbers from them.

I do know this is what the House from the 112th congress put together, nothing is left untouched. I keep seeing the big 3, as if that is the only place to make cuts. I go back again to the analogy of a person that psends more than they make, and hang part of their life on plastic.
If you do this, and need to cut expenses, do you think about the morning run to Dunkin Donuts ? Naw, that can't be it, that is only 2.35 for a XL coffee. Until you see it is ~ 600.00 per year you are spending at DD. Cuts in spending are cuts in spending, be it small, medium or large.
The Path plan by the GOP from the 112th congress has nothing left untouched, defense was one of the big line items to be cut by the GOP house members.
The pain is there, and everyone needs to share in it. I think the number before was ~ 24% across the board, and there would have been no need to raise the debt ceiling. Wow looked what happened with that, raise the amount, and go hunting for places to cut.
Of course, the America Jobs Act that Obama is touting ( and the DNC is going to be making TV commercials about ) cuts income even more.
1 line item really got me thinking what is the POTUS doing / This was the employer removal of new hires Social Security taxes ( being presented as a 50% payroll tax reduction - bit of a stretch there ). There is the note of looking for more cuts to pay for this, but the panel of 6 have not found the cuts for the debt ceiling increase yet, how are they going to come up with another $ 400B ?

I did not know that CBS took down the reporting.
Too factual to keep around I guess ( and the MSM is not biased.. ).

If you search for battery plant MI, there are still a few articles around on it.
The DOE website has very little info on the specific JCI deal, it talks in general terms of the $ 25B it had to work with.

The meat I guess was not well received was the part about the 300M govt and $ 300M invested by JCI would produce a battery manufacturing plant that some how was going to lower the cost of the battery ( that cars like the Volt use ) from $ 33K per battery to $ 16K per battery, but no indication of how the $ 600M investment was going to be recouped.
Add in the kicker, the battery plant by 2015 would be producing more batteries than the demand required, which would lead to layoffs or a work slow down within 4 years.
At the moment, each job has cost JCI $ 2m and the Fed Govt $ 2m to make ( $ 300M from each, and 150 new jobs created ).
That is the 111th congress and the POTUS method of a jobs bill, the were too busy with the Health Care Law ( I am sure you saw the blood bath the DNC did with that one ).

 

If the government would get out of the way (see the other points on my list), perhaps that would not be the case.

Basically, our leaders have intentionally chosen to hinder manufacturing and to increase energy costs.

Whatever the motivation, these decisions cost jobs and hurt the economy.

If we had not driven industry out of this nation and if we had encouraged cheap energy, the economy would be much better off.

Oh well. Water under the bridge at this point.

 

The big three I always hear touted are Social Security, Defense and Medicare/aid. The federal retirements are not as generous as they once were. Soon all of the people covered by the old retirement will be retired and they will start dieing off. That will bring those costs back down. As to the current system. Most government workers are white collar workers. Most of those white collar workers are being paid below what the private market would pay for similar knowledge, skills, and abilities by a large amount. The only two things that make government employment attractive is the relatively few number of lay offs, and the retirement annuity (for most workers it equals less than 30% of per retirement wages). The majority of the federal employee's retirement is a 401 type savings account and social security.

The only new portion created with DHS is TSA. Everything else was taken form other agencies. Customs and Border Protection combined border patrol, customs, and immigrations. Customs inspectors and immigration inspectors were combined to form one job (CBPO). Immediately after the formation of CBP there was no hiring for CBPO's because there were too many officers. Coast Guard had been DOT, until DHS took them. The point is DHS is actually a good idea. The parts that aren't working are the dip****s in Washington. The skunk and Obama have tied the hands of those enforcing the immigration laws so much that nothing is being done. Customs is a great way of increasing taxes. One huge one is the collection of user fees. Currently shippers are charged in the neighborhood of 6k per year to bring in as much product as they can get in. In the area I work we have literally hundreds of thousands of pounds of bananas come in every year. Even if the user fees were tripled, the total cost increase per banana would be less than .01.

 

It's true there are many towns where the only jobs that are around are minimum wage pay jobs. And the logical question we must ask is, "Why?" And that is because of the points posted by Dave.

It used to be minimum wage type jobs were transitional/temporary jobs for the young to gain job experience and pay for college/trade school or permanent jobs for a very low number of people that have chosen not to educate themselves or go through a trade school. Now I see many people in their 30's and 40's (sometimes even older) working these jobs.

If we continue with our current onerous regulations and 'free' trade policies/agreements, these low-paying jobs are going to be the norm for more and more people as more and more higher paying jobs move offshore. And no, the current administration isn't the only guilty party.

 

1depd, I purposefully left out Social Security because it is separately funded, even though it is, technically, a Government program involving expenditures and revenues. I recognize that some don't see it this way, but when Social Security tax is computed and administered separately from income tax, I don't see how it should be properly lumped together with the other spending programs.

Now, if you want to save Social Security by pushing back the optional and fully funded retirement ages, revising the way COLAs are calculated, increasing the limits on income that is taxed to fund it and, pay back the IOUs that are owed to the fund, I'm all for those measures.

I honestly feel the DHS brought a large increase into the size of the Government, even though, as you say, there was some consolidation of functions. The bureaucratic support for this new Department cannot have come without cost. In my opinion, the function of the TSA should go back to private industry (*gasp*), to be paid for by the airlines. It was not a failure on the part of airport security that led to 9-11, it was a failure in intelligence interpretation. But to be totally fair, it was really the non-recognition of a previously unknown "failure mode" that led to this disaster. We had never thought it might be possible for a hijacked aircraft to be used as a weapon. Now that we know, it is simple to counter that particular threat, and we've already done most of it. My only addition would be to arm all pilots with pistols and the license to use them.

And Steve, I get what you say about cutting across the board. Yes, small cuts DO add up. I happen to think though, that some of the smaller programs have already suffered enough in cuts and could not take more without becoming totally dysfunctional. Of course you might argue that some programs should not exist at all and you might be right.

- Jack

 

Jack, I can understand leaving out Social Security, but the reason I always include it is because it is a government expenditure. I guess it is like how some people include their house in net worth while others don't. Either is valid.

I agree the TSO's should go back to private industry. I do not agree that the TSA inspectors should go back to private industry. There are too many regulations that fall squarely on their shoulders that are used in ways that increase the nation's security that many people don't see or realize. I recently worked on one of those programs and found the job very interesting, if not a bit scary. If you want to get technical about it everyone of the hijackers were here on an education visa and had overstayed their permitted time. If the skunk and Obama actually let ICE do their jobs overstays and other illegals would not be in the country very long. I'm not pointing fingers only at them, but since 9/11 programs have come online that make it very easy to check the status of visas, overstays, and those out of status (i.e. dropouts). Prior to 9/11 there were no programs to easily check those statuses making the job almost impossible.

 

Social Security didn't have a COLA in 2011. I am not sure, but I thought the past 3 years were the same, no COLA ( had to do with CPI not moving ).

The fun part, without a COLA, the Medicare Part B payment ( for the majority of the Social Security recipients ) did not change either. This means the state is paying any increases in the Part B premiums for the past 3 (?) years, which is a direct hit on the budget.

Thing with upping the limit on income that Social Security is funded from, we are now back to the "rich" can afford it, take it from them, as the increase in the ceiling for the Social Security calculations does not change what a person is getting out of it. I assume you are talking about other than the adjusted ( current $ 106K per year ) gross earnings. This was flat from 2010 to 2011, and next year it is going up to $ 110K, and has a $ 3K to $4K per year increase until 2016, when it jumps $ 6K, and then $ 5K for every year after that from 2017 to 2021. In 2021 the estimated amount now is $ 153K is what the 12.4 is pulled from ( 6.2 from the employee and 6.2% from the employer or the full from Self employed ).

The problem with Social Security, out of the 54 million people on it, 40% are not retired. The 60% are using it as retirement funding, but the other 40% are death benefits and disability insurance.
This is the section of Social Security that is running a big drain on the system
The CBO AUG-2011 Social Security baseline report shows the hole that is being dug with this type of payments.

The American Jobs Act is going to cut the Social Security tax by 50% for new additions to the work force ( think this also had an exclusion for handing out raises ), so remove the 2% holiday from the govt this year, next year there is going to be a 6.2% income shortage into the system for any new entrants ( and there are other cases within this section ).

The Social Security baseline report that targeted 2040 as the cross over to neg does not take into account the bill that the POUTS is pushing ( and the DNC is making TV commercials about ). The target could be as soon as 2030 for the cross over to neg, and keep in mind Social Security by law is not allowed to run negative.
This is for the primary intention for SS.
The Disability Insurance part of Social Security is going to go neg in 2016 at the current rate.

With the near term 2016 date for SS-DI, you can expect either the OASI section to pay over into the DI section, or a new budget transfer from the GA fund to SS-DI to keep it running.

Keep in mind, the only reason the OASI section had a surplus of $ 103B in 2010 was due to interest payments to the fund.
Without Interest payments, OASI would have had a deficit of $ 6B.
If the money that is loaned out from SS to other areas ( with interest ) is paid back, the system goes insolvent.

The combined OASI & DI had a interest included surplus of $ 82B ( DI ran a $ 21B deficit spending in 2010 ) and the non interest balance was $ -37B.

So paying back this money that is loaned out will cause it more problems than it has now.