 |
| Deroy Murdoch |
For all of this week's talk about President Obama's "second stimulus," why do so many Americans feel less stimulated than chafed? The parade of stimuli that President George W. Bush launched and the "stimulator in chief" has accelerated has left America impoverished, indebted, and increasingly jobless. And now, Obama wants more. Obama unveiled an attractive item or two while attempting to defibrillate the dreary economy and Democrats' dismal electoral prospects. Supply-siders long have wanted to scrap the depreciation tables and let businesses immediately deduct capital purchases. Too bad Obama wants to permit this tax-and-simplification benefit for only one year. Perhaps seeking the Nobel Prize in alliteration, Obama Tuesday proposed $50 billion for "Roads, Rails, and Runways." This plan supposedly will help some of America's 14.9 million unemployed citizens.However, that expenditure would span six years, despite the touted "shovel readiness" of public-works projects. Even if one applauds such spending, shouldn't it happen right now?
What about Obama's previous magnum opus? In February 2009, he signed a $787 billion stimulus that has swelled to $814 billion. The Congressional Budget Office on Aug. 24 estimated that this measure "created or saved" between 1.4 million and 3.3 million jobs while spending, so far, about 70 percent of this money. Assuming the rosiest scenario, these $570 billion created 3.3 million jobs at a stunning $172,727 each. Paradoxically, these alleged jobs have grown even as jobs have disappeared. Read more here:
Posts
2 comments:
I thought we were unemployed first and then impoverished later. Maybe we've just decided to move right on to impoverished because the unemployed have been forgotten altogether. It appears Obama is proposing that small business hiring funds be confiscated so the "Commander Of Impoverished" can pay off a few bureaucrats and return 20 to 30 cents on the dollar back to small business to hire. Who said this guy isn't efficient? How many political clowns do you know who can kill two birds with one stone?
After two years of failed economic policies and no incentives whatsoever to encourage hiring, barring a windfall of business growth, why would any small business man want to hire new employees in this high tax environment? What would be the payoff? Would the payoff be to HOPE things get better? When Bush cut taxes for those in a position to hire and Reagan cut taxes the economy grew. Maybe Obama should have taken a history course instead of going to law school. We have enough lawyers but not nearly enough leaders who understand that raising taxes on the people who hire will result in less hiring. Is this too difficult a concept to understand?
Post a Comment