Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Job Policies: An Experiment

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1Job Policies:  An Experiment Empty Job Policies: An Experiment on 8/13/2012, 2:13 pm

Floridatexan

Floridatexan
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Job-Policies-An-Experimen-by-Robert-McElvaine-120813-83.html#comment387933

So, Mitt Romney and his new running mate, Paul Ryan, say their policies will produce 12 million new jobs.

They insist that the way to improve the economy and create jobs is to lower taxes on upper-income people and reduce government regulation.

As it happens, we have had in the two most recent eight-year presidencies a rough experiment in which this belief has been tested.

Here are the relevant facts from those two presidencies:

When Bill Clinton pushed to raise the top marginal tax rate by 3.6 percent in 1993, "conservative" economists howled that it would produce economic disaster and destroy jobs. Every single Republican in Congress, agreeing with that prediction, voted against the Clinton Budget.

When George W. Bush pushed in 2001 to lower the top marginal rate by the same amount, he said, as Romney, Ryan and all the other "R's" do now, it would be a boon to the economy and produce millions of jobs.

What were the actual results?

Job Creation under Bill Clinton & George W. Bush



(chart)


Under Clinton, 23 million jobs--almost twice as many as Romney even claims his opposite policies would produce--were created (2,900,000 per year), by far the most under any president in American history. There was the longest period of sustained prosperity in American history. And by the time President Clinton left office, there was a budget surplus.

Under the second Bush, approximately 3 million new jobs were created (375,000 per year), the lowest annual average since the Great Depression. The very rich "job creators" got much richer, and everyone else stagnated or declined - and, of course, the surplus vanished in a sea of red ink.

Put another way, approximately the same number of jobs were created each year under , Progressive Point Clinton as were created in the entirety of the second Bush's eight-year presidency.

And those figures on the consequences of the Bush policies do not even include the staggering loss of 5 million jobs that occurred during 2009, before the Obama program fully took effect. If the 2009 figures are added to (or, more accurately, subtracted from) George W. Bush's record, his policies--the policies on which the Romney-Ryan ticket wants to double down, lost about 2 million jobs.

Here is perhaps the most instructive way to look at what a fact-based analysis indicates about the faith-based belief that lowering taxes on "job creators" is the way to create more jobs:

Even leaving the 2009 job losses out of the calculation, jobs were created under Clinton's policies at a rate nearly eight times faster than they were during the second Bush's business- and high-income-friendly policies--precisely the policies that Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the Republican Party now want to take to an even more disastrous level...


2Job Policies:  An Experiment Empty Re: Job Policies: An Experiment on 8/13/2012, 2:19 pm

Guest


Guest
Floridatexan wrote:http://www.opednews.com/articles/Job-Policies-An-Experimen-by-Robert-McElvaine-120813-83.html#comment387933

So, Mitt Romney and his new running mate, Paul Ryan, say their policies will produce 12 million new jobs.

They insist that the way to improve the economy and create jobs is to lower taxes on upper-income people and reduce government regulation.

As it happens, we have had in the two most recent eight-year presidencies a rough experiment in which this belief has been tested.

Here are the relevant facts from those two presidencies:

When Bill Clinton pushed to raise the top marginal tax rate by 3.6 percent in 1993, "conservative" economists howled that it would produce economic disaster and destroy jobs. Every single Republican in Congress, agreeing with that prediction, voted against the Clinton Budget.

When George W. Bush pushed in 2001 to lower the top marginal rate by the same amount, he said, as Romney, Ryan and all the other "R's" do now, it would be a boon to the economy and produce millions of jobs.

What were the actual results?

Job Creation under Bill Clinton & George W. Bush



(chart)


Under Clinton, 23 million jobs--almost twice as many as Romney even claims his opposite policies would produce--were created (2,900,000 per year), by far the most under any president in American history. There was the longest period of sustained prosperity in American history. And by the time President Clinton left office, there was a budget surplus.

Under the second Bush, approximately 3 million new jobs were created (375,000 per year), the lowest annual average since the Great Depression. The very rich "job creators" got much richer, and everyone else stagnated or declined - and, of course, the surplus vanished in a sea of red ink.

Put another way, approximately the same number of jobs were created each year under , Progressive Point Clinton as were created in the entirety of the second Bush's eight-year presidency.

And those figures on the consequences of the Bush policies do not even include the staggering loss of 5 million jobs that occurred during 2009, before the Obama program fully took effect. If the 2009 figures are added to (or, more accurately, subtracted from) George W. Bush's record, his policies--the policies on which the Romney-Ryan ticket wants to double down, lost about 2 million jobs.

Here is perhaps the most instructive way to look at what a fact-based analysis indicates about the faith-based belief that lowering taxes on "job creators" is the way to create more jobs:

Even leaving the 2009 job losses out of the calculation, jobs were created under Clinton's policies at a rate nearly eight times faster than they were during the second Bush's business- and high-income-friendly policies--precisely the policies that Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the Republican Party now want to take to an even more disastrous level...



What it sounds like your trying to say is we need to vote for Bill Clinton for president again, since BHO has been a total dismal failure.

3Job Policies:  An Experiment Empty Re: Job Policies: An Experiment on 8/13/2012, 2:43 pm

Guest


Guest
alecto wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:http://www.opednews


What it sounds like your trying to say is we need to vote for Bill Clinton for president again, since BHO has been a total dismal failure.

I'd vote for Hillary if she ran. Obama promised to create 7 million jobs when he first ran for president. That was a monumental failure (cue floridaT to blame it on Bush). It's pretty easy to say anything on the campaign trail but the reality is like hitting a brick wall when it doesn't happen.

4Job Policies:  An Experiment Empty Re: Job Policies: An Experiment on 8/13/2012, 9:18 pm

othershoe1030

othershoe1030
nochain wrote:



I'd vote for Hillary if she ran. Obama promised to create 7 million jobs when he first ran for president. That was a monumental failure (cue floridaT to blame it on Bush). It's pretty easy to say anything on the campaign trail but the reality is like hitting a brick wall when it doesn't happen.

The brick wall of reality! That's one thing we can hopefully count on as a reason to not go crazy when we hear that according to the Ryan budget Romney would pay a tax rate of 0.08% or whatever they claim. As bad as it sounds, and it does sound bad, it will never really happen. It does show which target the R's are shooting at. I've never seen so many bad ideas being presented as solutions!

5Job Policies:  An Experiment Empty Re: Job Policies: An Experiment on 8/14/2012, 12:21 am

Markle

Markle
Floridatexan wrote:http://www.opednews.com/articles/Job-Policies-An-Experimen-by-Robert-McElvaine-120813-83.html#comment387933

So, Mitt Romney and his new running mate, Paul Ryan, say their policies will produce 12 million new jobs.

They insist that the way to improve the economy and create jobs is to lower taxes on upper-income people and reduce government regulation.

As it happens, we have had in the two most recent eight-year presidencies a rough experiment in which this belief has been tested.

Here are the relevant facts from those two presidencies:

When Bill Clinton pushed to raise the top marginal tax rate by 3.6 percent in 1993, "conservative" economists howled that it would produce economic disaster and destroy jobs. Every single Republican in Congress, agreeing with that prediction, voted against the Clinton Budget.

When George W. Bush pushed in 2001 to lower the top marginal rate by the same amount, he said, as Romney, Ryan and all the other "R's" do now, it would be a boon to the economy and produce millions of jobs.

What were the actual results?

Job Creation under Bill Clinton & George W. Bush



(chart)


Under Clinton, 23 million jobs--almost twice as many as Romney even claims his opposite policies would produce--were created (2,900,000 per year), by far the most under any president in American history. There was the longest period of sustained prosperity in American history. And by the time President Clinton left office, there was a budget surplus.

Under the second Bush, approximately 3 million new jobs were created (375,000 per year), the lowest annual average since the Great Depression. The very rich "job creators" got much richer, and everyone else stagnated or declined - and, of course, the surplus vanished in a sea of red ink.

Put another way, approximately the same number of jobs were created each year under , Progressive Point Clinton as were created in the entirety of the second Bush's eight-year presidency.

And those figures on the consequences of the Bush policies do not even include the staggering loss of 5 million jobs that occurred during 2009, before the Obama program fully took effect. If the 2009 figures are added to (or, more accurately, subtracted from) George W. Bush's record, his policies--the policies on which the Romney-Ryan ticket wants to double down, lost about 2 million jobs.

Here is perhaps the most instructive way to look at what a fact-based analysis indicates about the faith-based belief that lowering taxes on "job creators" is the way to create more jobs:

Even leaving the 2009 job losses out of the calculation, jobs were created under Clinton's policies at a rate nearly eight times faster than they were during the second Bush's business- and high-income-friendly policies--precisely the policies that Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and the Republican Party now want to take to an even more disastrous level...

I take it that you somehow forgot the huge Dot.Com boom which started and ended during the administration of President William J. Clinton.

If you recall too, it was the Newt Gingrich driven Republican House who made good on their "Contract with America" promise to reform welfare. That was in 1996 and took millions of people off the welfare rolls and put them on payrolls.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum