Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Carolyn Kaster / AP
President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks about the economy and the deficit, Friday, Nov. 9, 2012, in the East Room of the White House in Washington.
Published Friday, Nov. 9, 2012 | 10:33 a.m.
Updated Friday, Nov. 9, 2012 | 10:53 a.m.
John Boehner
Sun coverage
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, laying down his marker for grueling "fiscal cliff" negotiations, said Friday he won't accept any approach to federal deficit reduction that doesn't ask the wealthy to pay more in taxes.
"This was a central question during the election," Obama said in his first postelection comments on the economy. "The majority of Americans agree with my approach."
The president, speaking in the White House East Room, said he wasn't wedded to every detail of the plans he outlined during the election, adding, "I'm open to compromise." But he offered no indication that he was willing to back down on his insistence that the wealthy pay more.
Republicans stood their ground. At the Capitol, Republican House Speaker John Boehner said he remains unwilling to raise tax rates on upper-income earners. But he left open the possibility of balancing spending cuts with new revenue that could be achieved by revising the tax code to lower rates and eliminate some tax breaks.
Obama said he had invited congressional leaders of both parties to the White House next week to start negotiations on averting the tax increases and automatic spending cuts due to hit in January. Both parties agree that those changes, the result of failed deficit-cut talks earlier this year, could send the economy back into recession.
The president avoided any mention of specific tax rates in his remarks, saying only that the wealthy should pay more. He also called on Congress to quickly pass an extension of tax cuts, first enacted by George W. Bush, for families making less than $250,000 a year.
Republicans, as they have throughout Obama's first term, say raising tax rates on wealthier Americans is a non-starter. Boehner said such increases would hurt small businesses just as they are trying to recover from the severe last recession.
"I'm proposing that we avert the fiscal cliff together in a manner that ensures that 2013 is finally the year that our government comes to grips with the major problems that are facing us," the speaker said. He said cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps, known as entitlement programs, have to be part of the equation.
Still, Boehner declined to provide specific proposals to avoid the fiscal cliff.
He did say that raising the debt limit, which the government will reach sometime in the spring, should be part of any negotiations. Pressed for details beyond that framework, he said he didn't want to limit ideas to address the problem. He burden is on Obama, he said.
"This is an opportunity for the president to lead," Boehner said. He repeated a version of that phrase four times during the 11 minutes he spoke. "This is his moment to engage the Congress and work toward a solution that can pass both chambers."
," Obama said in his first postelection comments on the economy. "The majority of Americans agree with my approach."
Just not true
---
First - America vote overwhelmingly for the Republican vision and agenda in the house.
Second - Obama did not win based on a vision and an agenda as witnessed by getting 9.7 million fewer disillusioned voters then in 2008 and just bearly 50% of the popular vote. A swing of 1.2% would have given it to Romney - historically the smallest margin ever
---
America consciously and deliberately voted for a status quo DIVIDED government.
A feel good redistributionist President and a fiscally responsible House.
This allows the President to constantly expand our dependency society while Americans are using the House as a firewall to try to contain the cost.
This allows the Democrats to play good guy to the Bad guy Republican.
Point is Democrats NEED the Republicans to blame for not being able to provide more and greater expanded goods while secretly accepting some sort of Fiscal control
I believe that Obama voters were more concerned about the potential of having entitlements reduced under a Republican plan. Obama preyed on that fear and won the election.
More to the point
Obama is now speaking about increase REVENUE FROM THE RICH
Obama also said he was open to new ideas
So let do TAX REFORM TO INCREASE REVENUES
That would be a win win compromise
The compromise is going to have to be instead of raising the top income rate by 4%..raise it by 2%.
That's compromise. The House can't stick to their guns because frankly they are down 2-1 (pres. and Senate democratic) and the longer this goes on and the longer they hold out there's a chance they could lose the House in 2014 or 2016. Then they have nothing and will get whatever the president wants shoved down their throat.
Americans were given a choice between two distinct visions. They chose to stay on course with Obama. If they wanted to lose their mortgage, medical, and charitable deductions they would have voted for Romney. Every poll has shown an overwhelming majority of Americans want a BALANCED approach. New revenue and spending cuts. When it comes to cuts the majority wants foreign aid cuts and foreign military bases cut...not social safety-nets.
If the majority of Americans wanted a privatized Medicare and Social Security...they would have voted for Romney.
If the majority of Americans wanted to kill Big Bird, Planned Parenthood, the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, and a host of other consumer protections...they would have voted for Romney.
As far as the Republican House majority; target every Republican that won in a district with a Democrat registered voter advantage or won by less than 5%. Dems have 195 seats and counting...they only need 23 Republicans...but Boehner would never allow a vote if those were the numbers.
To the Victor goes the spoils.
Advocating and promoting the proliferation of public theft through taxation deserves the harshest of consequences -- can anyone list all the current local, state and federal sources of income and attempt to justify borrowing?
If one can, then therein resides the problem.
Stealing the results of a citizenry's labor should never be allowed to result in prosperity.
: {
NO we don't. We don't want ANY more war. We don't want any encroachment on women. Just think of the cries and obscenities if a political party proposed scaling back Black people's rights? O. has failed to perform, economically, for four years. TURN IT AROUND. Get welfare out of the tax code. Get the federal government out of welfare. Get us out of Afghanistan. Keep us out of Syria. Bring our troops home from Europe, Guam, Japan. WWII has been over for about 70 years. Bring our troops HOME. We need those troops on our borders.
Wow so Obama just fired David Petraeus.from the CIA
He was one of the best we got and Obama dumped him.
Clearly the affair was a red herring
Ms. Anderson,
Military on our borders?
I would think that someone with your stated background would be aware of the Posse Comitatus Act.
@Roslenda
Wow! Another student of Republican Math.
Get over it, you lost. Your cause lost. Get up to date. This has always been an immigrant country and will ALWAYS be an immigrant country.
That bigoted fear mongering path is a path to a regional influence. Even your buddies at Faux News are beginning to recognize this truth.
Not says "To the Victor goes the spoils."
So true and Republicans are the victors in the HOUSE.
The House win was the will of the American people
Tom said "The compromise is going to have to be instead of raising the top income rate by 4%..raise it by 2%."
Wel keep in mind that a surcharge tax from Obamacare of 2.6% has already been passed as law
So Obama is pushing the 35% rate up to 41.6% (35 +4+2.6)
So the fact is that the rich are already paying 37.6% not 35%
The elephant in the room is future obligations by the government for medicare / medicaid, social security, debt servicing, defense, and the various social programs far and away overwhelms any paltry tax increases OR spending cuts being proposed, including "fiscal cliff".
Massive cuts (30% or so) to all of the aforementioned coupled with robust economic growth (5% annually or more) is what it would take to balance the budget and start to reduce the deficit.
BTW, no congress, current or future has any intention of reducing the national debt, partly because IF there was any money to do so the progressives and libs would not allow it. It will be a miracle if they can even balance a budget for a single year.
The "chosen one" won becaause there are more entitled takers in this country than hard working contributors.
The PRESIDENT won becaause there are more workers in this country than smug self serving millionaires.
Not says "To the Victor goes the spoils."
So true and Republicans are the victors in the HOUSE.
The House win was the will of the American people
-----------------
Your problem will be going forward. If you start losing seats in 2014 and 2016 to the point that you lose majority then you will be watching from the outside as anything Obama wants (or the next democratic president) will be given. You don't have endless time to hold out, Obama and the Democrats likely do.
One can only hope the "deficit approach" which results in the loading of food-stamp groceries into escalades will eventually end.
: {
Tom said "The compromise is going to have to be instead of raising the top income rate by 4%..raise it by 2%."
Wel keep in mind that a surcharge tax from Obamacare of 2.6% has already been passed as law
---------------
That's a different animal. You have to remember you are on the outside looking in now and your idea of compromise is going to have to favor what the democrats want. Such is the result of what happened on election day. As I stated, if you want Boehner to hold out its at your peril as seats come up for election in 2014 and 2016. You don't have endless time. The Democrats are working from a power position, you are working from seats that can be taken. My suggestion is that Boehner not get too cocky with his house advantage as that could easily change in a few years. Then you are really screwed.
Raising taxes during the Great Depression was one of the great actions of leadership by FDR that invigorated the economy, created working class incomes and helped win WWII. Eisenhower set the top tax rates at 90%. He felt it was worth the price that the soldiers paid during the war and correct as usual.
Highest Marginal tax rate vs. year:
1930 25%
1934 63%
1937 79%
1943 88%
1954 90% (Ike)
At the time of the 1929 stock market crash, the highest income tax rates (25%) were close to those sponsored by George W. Bush at the beginning of his term, destined to created another Stock Market crash in 2008.
FDR continued to raise income taxes during WWII, unlike W. Bush who borrowed money to fund the most expensive American war yet, Iraq. Bush does not read history - he proudly gets his information from higher sources.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/...
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
Get up to date. How much of a joke is it that he won the election base don his economic plan. Comp-lete unrealistic nonsense. he pandered to the auto workers, catered to females with planned parenthood. Catered to hispanics with vague promises of immigration reform and by an executive order. He got votes every where but from people with an economic ounce of logic. Nice try cause depite Romneys lack of catering to any group he almost got elected just from a lack of faith in Obama's economic policies.
The stock market reaction shpould tell you somehting, so should every CEO that is bracing for Obamacre by increasing prices and downsizing the workforce. OK you win, you all are geniuses in the most satirical sense I can convey.
Four years from now when unemployment is at an all time high an the borders are flooded from illegals trying to become citizens here and unemployment as at a reported 8% while the real number is more like 15%, you guys can come back here and say whatever you want because I will never say I told you so. I will drown with you because he is our elected President, but that does not change my view of his total lack of understanding the economy.
some facts for Future. The Electorate did not overwhelmingly vote for a Repugnant House. If you add up all the votes for the Dems and the Reps, you get more votes for the dems. Also if the repugnants hadn't Gerrymandered their districts as they did, The Dems would control the house today. As someone said "to the victors go the spoils" which is why the repugnants were able to do the gerrymandering of districts. I don't care who wins, when they win they get to dictate. Pres Obama won, he gets to dictate policy, and I for one, expect him to do so. If the repugnants don't lose their Bravado soon, They will have no relevance very quickly.
Let us see......Electoral College:big win; popular vote: plus 3 million; Senate: plus two seats; House; plus two with 7 still counting and Dems ahead in 5. Ok, so it's not a Nixon v. McGovern but it's a convincing win regardless of the many twists and turn contributing to Republican spin. Virtually every poll got it right, virtually every poll indicates that Americans want a reasonable approach to governance and solutions to issues, nearly every polls indicates that we understand the necessity for both tax increases and spending cuts, that we believe "trickle-down" to be a failed policy. Some of you guys need to move to Colorado or Washington where you can now buy and smoke enough weed to continue your dorm-room dissertations on the economy.
It is really no problem raising taxing on small business, go ahead, I will just let go of my least productive employee, I like firing people, hey just like my man Mitt! Life goes on.
it's the same thing they had in the clinton years and we were more balanced and prosperous than at any other time. also the wealthy have been paying less and less taxes over the years and they've been donating more and more to the GOP. think about it. change it back. america moves in the right direction. get boehner out of there.
I really have a hard time feeling sorry for all these multibillionaires who threw money to the wind with this election to the tune of 100 million or more. If you have that kind of money to throw around..you can definetely afford a little kick higher on your income tax rate. Don't worry, you're not going to go without maids, gardeners, butlers, your fleet of jets. As Warren Buffet has stated over and over he's never done or not done a business deal based on tax rates.
@ Hack :Too bad you don't understand Econ 101. If increased taxes are applied equally all costs go up the same, you and your competitor. You all therefore raise prices a similar amount and remain equally competitive.
This American doesn't agree with your vision Mr. President
I am ok raising the taxes, but lets be FAIR about it. That seems to be a word used a lot lately. Lets go ahead and raise the top tax bracket by 4%, but raise the middle ones by 2% and lets raise the bottom bracket by 1%.
Translation: The bottom tax bracket should be 1%! It should not be Zero.
The great divide we have in this county is real simple. Taxpayers dont like non-taxpayers, and non-taxpayers dont like taxpayers (becasue they are deemed wealthy).
Everyone should be a taxpayer at some level - That level should be at least 1% - Period
And dont give me that happy horse crap about non-taxpayers cant afford it and that they already pay sales taxes. That just proves my point, because if you can afford to pay 8.1% sales tax then 1% is nothing!
The purpose would not be to punish anyone, only to make everyone a taxpayer and start to repair the divide by making everyone a taxpayor!
The American People DO AGREE with your vision Mr. President, which is exactly why you won!
CONGRATULATIONS, Mr. President. Keep up the good work.
"This American doesn't agree with your vision Mr. President"
---------------
Yes, but your side lost. The bottom line is you are going to have to acquiese to a higher tax rate on wealthy Americans. This is what the President wants, he was re-elected and contrary to republican belief you can't hold out forever. Elections will do you in. Then you will be forced to accept whatever the Democrats want. I know it's a bitter pill to swallow that you lost on election day...but that's reality. There's no use in fighting a battle already lost. Now, if you want to start another battle with taxes you will be doing so at great peril. See note above about eventually having to accept whatever Democrats want if they can take back the House. Time is NOT on your side, contrary to your belief.
Tom says "This American doesn't agree with your vision Mr. President"
---------------
Yes, but your side lost. The bottom line is you are going to have to acquiese to a higher tax rate"
Dear Tom you lost the HOUSE
GET OVER IT
Obama only got about a quarter of the voting population and that is no MAJORITY.
Obama got 9.7 milliomn fewer votes then in 2008.
GET OVER IT
TomD and all the other gracious winners... "but your side lost"; just like when Gore lost and the Republicans gloated it came back to bite them.
Remembering people on the way up makes your fall a little softer.
If the Libs really want cooperation and taxes on the "rich" they should show a little more class.
Me personally, I don't mind paying more taxers (not rich) but I really mind paying taxes that are just spent willy nilly. If this Pres and crew really want to help the American people his BS transparency will be actual transparency.
@Future and Heretic
If your side wasn't so angry with their name calling, Obummer, O'dumba, send the Kenyan packing et al....you'd be the recipient of far less gloating. You reap what you sow.
I've never seen more hate from the right until this election started. As I said, you reap what you sow. Personally, I get up, go to work, pay my bills, take a vacation...Who is president doesn't greatly affect me or my way of life. Some of you act like your world was coming to an end if Obama won. Pathetic.
TomD, I have never associated with the R's and their silly name games. I keep telling you I voted for Obama once... Not twice.
It's okay though..... Keep up the "mission accomplished" banter; you are exposing your position.
You have very well written and argued posts about personal responsibly and not having been involved in police altercations. Good for you... Me neither.
You just need to understand that YOUR vitriole is on you and not some other poster for payback. You appear way more intelligent than that.
You see Heretic, it's not just the silly name games like "NoBama", it's also stuff like this I listed below. Who are you trying to fool? Your rhetoric has been abysmal this election. I've never shown any disrespect to Romney or his supporters from a personal standpoint like your nonsense posts below. What can I tell you, it comes home to roost.
"The President sanctioned the murders of four Americans and he just doesn't care."
"The Obama-nots are still hurling invectives like the scared sheep they are."
---------
This stuff gets old buddy, real old.
TomD, dude, you need to get a life. If those posts are insulting to your sensitivities then you need to put your big boy pants on.
I do think that the President doesn't care based on the four different version he kept putting out there. He put politics in front of the truth.
You are kidding me if think Obama-nots is offensive. Wow.
No worries, keep roosting while there is real work to do.
Sorry wharfrat, I believe you are the one with little knowledge about Econ, Taxes and Logic. Raising Taxes on the top 2%, will have a bigger impact upon revenue. Maintaining the tax cuts for the bottom 98% will provide help for the economy. The public has spoken about the Republican stance of "No'. If they continue this tack for the next year, they will lose the midterms.
Only explanation as to why Obama won....the 47% saying....Gimme mo' money..
@heretic
As I said, stating the president "sanctioned" the murder of 4 Americans is beyond low brow...but keep it up if you like. It's a free country. Maybe some day you'll realize why the republicans are losing.
The Obama-nots stuff is childish verbiage.
@nisa715
"Fact is most Americans that voted for him are really just stupid. Most Obama voters have no idea what he has accomplished or what he has failed at. They simply are following along with what others tell them. Most Obama voters really are just very stupid people."
Oh really? All ten of the states with the highest percentage of people with degrees voted for Obama.
Nine of the ten states with lowest amount of people with college degrees voted for Romney.
So, it appears that the FACTS bear out that the STUPID people voted for Romney.
http://static.happyplace.com/assets/imag...
Also, eight of the ten wealthiest counties voted for Obama. But, they're probably stupid also, right?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-wins...
You anti Obama bots:
I know you are ticked off you didn't get the fireworks show Mitt bought for you, but he got over it immediately (within 90 minutes) and showed a hastily written modicum of class. He also cancelled all of his staffers credit cards at the same time, leaving many of them stranded at airports and in cabs needing to pay their own way home.
So Mitt had a little victory, he got to fire his staff before they went to sleep. And Mitt lives happily ever after.
God Bless all of you, and get over yourselves, it is over.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09...
Some people blame Obama for the drop in stocks. I hardly think that the result of the election caused it. Perhaps it's the looming cliff America is facing?
Read the above news article. I trust average Americans' feelings more than I would ever trust the stock market. Wall street manipulators lurk in every cell phone, IPad, and laptop.
The Republican loss is simple to explain: Listen to people.
Spending a billion to change what people already believe to be true does not work.
Four more years of Obama blaming everyone but himself... Nothing changed except more taxes and entitlements... Enjoy...
This is what the Future of the republican party offers.
1 + 1 = 3
A loss is really a win
Failed policy will work if you keep trying.
We can't raise sufficient revenue, even if we were to confiscate 100% of the assets of the richest Americans. Doing so would raise 1.7 trillion dollars. And we would still have 14.3 trillion in debt.
We must stop spending. And any responsible politician would insist on us doing so.
Obama appeals to our envy and resentment of those who have more than we do. His approach gains votes, but no solution to our crushing debt problems.
Likewise, our massive welfare state seems to do little to alleviate suffering. In fact, our inner cities are miserable places with death coming too often to young Americans who never even get the chance to reach adulthood. And this after 12 trillion tax dollars spent to help, every penny of that money spent under the direction of local Democrat politicians, over the last five decades.
At some point, a genuinely concerned leader would admit that we must try something different, if we sincerely want to help, and not simply buy votes and increase and consolidate the power of the Democrat leaders.
You had republicans controlling the presidency, the Senate AND the house in the 106th, 107th, 108th and I believe the 109th sessions....and somehow the country blew up financially in 2008. You can't keep blaming democrats when you CONTROLLED government for how many years in a row and we still went off a cliff.
Somehow the Democrats can get ObamaCare thru without control of everything but republicans can not get any of their agenda thru all the while controlling all 3 parts for years and years?
We will find out if Obama needs more time to right the ship....or not. My point is that 8 years under Bush2 sent us spiraling downward until the populace was so disgusted that they voted "anybody" but a republican president. It just so happened it was an extremely liberal democrat. The republican party had many, many years of TOTAL control in the 2000's and by the time they left office we had an economic shambles. You can't keep blaming democrats or their supporters. At some point you better damn well look inward and ask why and what I can do?
The Democrats took control of both Houses in 2008. By 2010 we were in an economic shambles. Congress spends the money. At least that is how our Constitution designed it.
Obama is personally responsible for 44% of the crushing debt facing our children and their children.
You can spend and ignore for only so long. And then you go bankrupt. Decent people in Greece are breaking into each others' homes to steal food. I don't want that for our country. And it is our country. Not red states or blue states, but the United States. Which reminds me, we have real enemies, not one another, and we must stand united against them.
We've been dropping upwards of 1 billion per day, each and everyday since the invasion of Iraq on a bogus WMD edict. In addition we've been dropping another 1 billion per day in Afghanistan. Our troops continue to get slaughtered over there by so called friendly fire. No one wants to talk about the debt when it mentions defense spending or foreign aid to Egypt or Israel (which Romney would have increased massively ).
BTW, the economic shambles was hitting here by 2008. All reputable sources call it the "2008 financial crisis" as Lehman went bust, credit markets froze and real estate collapsed. Where you are getting "by 2010" is beyond me.
1997-1999 repubuplican control of House and Senate
1999-2001 republican control of House, Senate, Bush took over from Clinton
2001-2003 republican control of president, House, Senate 50/50 split
2003-2004 republican control of president, House and Senate
2005-2007 republican control of president, House and senate
2008 Financial crisis hits. Yes, let's blame Democrats who essentially lost any all control after Clinton left office until the 110th congress
The mandate is , raise the tax rate on the top 2% and get rid of their loopholes. I can't wait to see the next Saw movie. I heard they will use fireworks in it.
In January 2007, when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took control of Congress, the unemployment rate was 4.6% and the national debt was $8.6 trillion. Today, unemployment is 7.9 % (or so a gullible public is being told) and the nation is $16+ trillion (and growing at light speed) in debt. This means every taxpayer in America is $130,000 in debt.
Obama spends more on federal welfare EACH YEAR than Bush spent on the Iraq War during his entire presidency. Which I wouldn't mind, if welfare were helping anybody. In fact it is clearly a life destroyer.
Neither Obama or any of the rest of the politicians give a damn about any of us. They are not our friends. If the poor Hispanics were going to vote Republican, Obama would build a one way train to Mexico and have it running 24/7.
Politicians are not our friends. They are not my friend. They are not your friend. Mr. Obama is borrowing 42 cents of every dollar he is spending. Obama has built his record breaking increases in federal welfare spending into permanent baseline spending.
Mr. Obama cares about one thing, and that is accumulating more power. They use our tax money to bribe and divide us, pitting us against each other, like a terrible parent. And they are leaving the bill for our children to pay.
My gosh, but the TeaNuts are STILL fuming...
Hey, Future; how's lil' Tark holding up?
Guess what, TeaNuts...
The UBER WEALTHY are gonna have to pony UP.
NO, it won't 'balance the budget'; but it WILL help, and it WILL HAPPEN.
The Prez is correct; he has the backing of the populous for his plan; a BALANCED PLAN of cuts & tax increases on the wealthiest among us.
Remember ALL those 'swing states', and how they were 'in play' for Mittens?
He lost EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, save North Carolina.
"but they were CLOSE, so it's no mandate!"
Sorry, Charlie...'close' only counts in Horseshoes & Hand Grenades.
What really struck me was that the President carried the upper Midwest; Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan...ALL OF THEM.
Those are some pretty smart, educated, common-sense folks up yonder.
Look at the petty, name calling leftists, just like their divisive leader.
United we stand, divided we fall.
My Father was an immigrant. Never did he expect anything but opportunity. He worked hard and made his own way. All of that hard work was what built the greatest economy and country in the history of civilization. Not people demanding to take what they never earned.
All of which is beside the point. Take 100% of the assets of America's wealthy. Look at France. As Hollande is discovering, the rich are simply moving away.
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic".
Benjamin Franklin.
The GOP has damaged the economy. Unemployment extensions, the Bush tax cuts have added billions to the national debt.
This time, Pres Obama need to get it right. LET THE BUSH TAX CUTS EXPIRE! Both party will be responsible for the military budget and entitlement cuts, and the anticipated 'FISCAL CLIFF'.
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT EXIST IS; 1.5 million, or 53.6 %, of bachelor's degree-holders under the age of 25 last year were jobless or underemployed, the highest share in at least 11 yrs. In 2000, the share was at a low of 41%, before the dot-com bust erased job gains for college graduates in the telecommunications and IT fields...Out of the 1.5 million who languished in the job market, about half were underemployed, an increase from the previous yr. Today, the unemployment is 7.9%. Getting a college degree, today, discourages smart kids from going to college. Since they can earn the same wages with a Diploma or GED..(STATE EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION HAVE DATA ON JOBS INTERVIEWS, IN WHICH INTERVIEWEE DID NOT MEET THE MIN REQUIREMENTS FOR JOBS).
On the other hand, there are more than 3.6 million unfilled jobs across the country. This is the highest level of job vacancies in nearly 4yrs, and if just half of those jobs were filled, the unemployment rate would fall to 6.5%..Plus, there is new growth in Health Care, due to Obamacare. The U.S. Dept of Labor expects more than 5,500,000 jobs to be formed in healthcare alone, between 2012 and 2020. America should invest more money in fed grants or companies co-op, in order to get those unemployed, underemployed back to work with college degrees, or qualify them for some other high paying job.. Employment re-constructing, will give the educated proper 'on the job training' or 'skill' to land the job, instead of giving unemployed benefits...The Obama admin has also invested in new green jobs, which requires additional training.
There is also a shortage of Class A Truck Drivers. America should invest in Grants for those with Class B license, unemployed, to get Class A Training and License...Again, there are Drafter and industrial Art majors, unemployed, and their skills are out of date. Once again, those that are familiar with blueprints and engineering drawings can be trained to be CNC operators. There are shortages of middle class CNC operators, which requires math aptitude, blueprint reading and programming skills. To grow the middle class, Obama need to INCREASE TAXES ON THE RICH and invest that money in On the Job Training to Non-Multi National Companies.
Prior to the dot-com bust, major company trends indicates less investing in Co-op education, On-the-Job-training and College Summer jobs, and less investment into Univ R & D. Company training and investments give college students the insight into future technological trends, in order to create new businesses and jobs; And to prepare existing American companies for tomorrow.
joinamerica...
That's some nifty propaganda you've been spreading here @ the Sun the past couple of weeks.
All of this nonsense about 'voting yourself free stuff'...
POPPYCOCK.
Diversionary tactics.
The Bush era tax cuts for the upper 2 percent are HISTORY.
THERE'S your 'free stuff', pal.
All this 'we're the next Greece!' and 'liberals are all awful freeloaders!' is SMOKE being blown by Right Wing Propagandists.
Nobody posting here is the top 2%. We are working people and those of us with the faintest knowledge of history know that socialism is an old idea that has failed wherever and whenever it has ever been tried.
All over Northern Europe, young hardworking people are emigrating elsewhere because they will not spend their lives working to support those that won't.
The people that are pulling the wagon are not the rich. It is those of us who get up and go to work everyday. But we understand economics and realize that if you tax small business, you will lose millions of jobs, because small business is the economic backbone and are the major employers of America.
It happens every time. The stagnant economies all over Europe (where they are trying to divest themselves of the very failed policies that Obama is forcing upon us), are proof.