Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Call My Congressman: (202) 225-4155 - Ask Him What Jobs Are Being Created in the Republican Jobs Act

Posted 2 years ago on March 28, 2012, 10:54 a.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic (5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Call congressman Lee Terry and ask what jobs are being created in the new Jobs Act.

Seriously call and ask - (202) 225-4155

http://forms.house.gov/terry/webforms/zip_auth.shtm

This bill is being touted as "job creation" by the republicans and is getting passed by both democrats and republicans. This bill is actually just redefining terms and deregulating aspects of the financial industry and changing aspects of investing. This bill does not even create a single job. So ask Lee Terry what job is being created in the jobs act. Stop the fraud!

The government can not create jobs unless they hire government employees or they sponsor projects with money, like building roads, schools, guns, tanks, bombs, etc... That is the only way they can create jobs. Tax breaks for billionaires and deregulation are not the same as creating jobs.

"Once again the 'bipartisan' consensus in Washington, fueled by an intoxicating brew of conventional wisdom laced with campaign cash, has repealed some of those 'cumbersome regulations' that do nothing of value - nothing, that is, except prevent catastrophes. There will be celebrating on both sides of the aisle when the President signs this bill.

And when disaster strikes a few years from now, as it inevitably will, they'll all say "Nobody could have seen it coming." - http://www.nationofchange.org/dumbest-bipartisan-move-repealing-glass-steagall-1332569940

Read the bill yourslef - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3606rh/pdf/BILLS-112hr3606rh.pdf

30 Comments

30 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Yes, this is the 7th job bill that House republicans passed in a year. Let's hope this one does not get held up by Senate Democrats like the other ones were.

Actually the regulation changes in the bill are GOOD because they target small and start up businesses. These businesses are the true engine of the economy. They do not require tax dollars to create jobs like government "shovel ready" jobs do.

It is great that you have a link to the bill however if you actually read it, you would see that the changes in regulations are GOOD.

If you actually read it you would see that it creates a category of “emerging growth companies” to lower the costs of initial public offerings for smaller firms.

If you actually read it you would see it removes an S.E.C. prohibition on small companies using advertisements to solicit investors, a ban that dates to 1982.

If you actually read it you would see it contains a measure that lifts restrictions on “crowd funding” so entrepreneurs can raise capital from large pools of small investors.

If you actually read it you would see that it increases the number of shareholders permitted to invest in a community bank to 2,000 from 500.

Sometimes it is nice to see them remove some regulations. If not you just keep adding regulations and never remove others you end up with situations like this: http://tinyurl.com/cyal4l5

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Yep I read the bill. Just redefines the term Emerging Growth Company and changes the bar to $1,000,000,000 and removes legislation.

This bill is being touted as job creation. What jobs is this bill creating? It's a subversive tactic to gain support. What small business will be hiring a lot of employees after this bill passes? Name one.

What you said in your comment is the same type of rhetoric they used when they passed the financial modernization act of 1999. And the few "senate democrats" that tried to hold up things during the financial modernization act, THEY WERE RIGHT! And they're right now.

Why would you trust something written by far right republicans?

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Redefining that amount does several things. It allows companies that are growing to continue to grow without being subject to Sarbanes Oxley a process that adds significant burden on a growing company.

I was watching the founder of "Staples" last fall on a program and he admitted that a lot of the regulations in Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd/Frank benefit his company buy preventing the little guys from growing.

Also, increasing the number of shareholders permitted to invest in a community bank to 2,000 from 500 allows a group with less money to start a community bank which in turn can invest in the community which in turn creates jobs. The current setup protects existing banks at the expense of smaller investors that are closer to the community.

Removing the S.E.C. prohibition on small companies using advertisements to solicit investors will certainly create jobs.

I am not sure why you would be against any of this. Perhaps you prefer protecting the established banks and businesses at the expense of the newer smaller ones.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

This bill is being touted as job creation. What jobs is this bill creating? What small business will be hiring a lot of employees after this bill passes? Name one.

Now we have this "JOBS" Act, which undoes Sarbanes-Oxley's key provisions. In a typically cynical move, the corrupt dealmakers of DC have appropriated two good ideas - "crowdfunding" by individuals, as is done on Kickstarter, and the need to find investment capital for small and medium-sized businesses that are the engines of job growth.

But this bill will actually hurt both those efforts. Kickstarter finances creative projects, where it's fairly easy for investors to decide whether they feel a project has artistic merit. But this bill will unleash a torrent of unscrupulous scam artists onto the public, leaving them unable to decide which project has merit and which doesn't. Since these ventures won't be required to provide some basic financial data, many of them will bilk their investors - drying up the pool of available capital for truly worthwhile startups.

Besides, why have we been pumping capital into the nation's banks through the Fed? Wasn't the purpose of all that support - including TARP - to prop them up so that they would lend to American businesses?

Worse, the bill is designed so that even billion-dollar corporations can be considered "startups," leaving the door open for a dozen Enrons of tomorrow to shaft the unwary. The common-sense protections proposed by Sen. Jeff Merkley were rejected, while the equally rational protections of Sens. Scott Brown and Jack Reed, which were passed, will be fairly easy for clever sharks to swim around. We've seen this play before, and it never has a happy ending. That will no longer be required of them, thanks to the "JOBS" Act.

Even that phony name - "JOBS Act" - isn't new. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley used the same acronym for an equally cynical bill in 2004, the "Jumpstart Our Business Strength" Act. Then, as now, the bill was supposed to create jobs. What it really did was provide $39 billion in tax cuts for overseas earnings by US corporations. Create jobs? Not so much.

Now can look forward to another signing ceremony, filled with smiling and happy bipartisan faces. None of the people at that ceremony will pay the price when the bill for their actions comes due a few years from now. But you and I will.

And unless we change our political system, soon after that the whole process will begin again. When will we ever learn?

Why would you trust a bill written by far right republicans?

[-] 0 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 2 years ago

Sarbanes Oxley adds tons of overhead to running a business and did nothing to prevent Bernie Madoff, thr 2008 Seimons scandal, The 2010 Lehman Brothers scandal, Solyndra, the Housing Crisis, the bailouts....

When you allow small businesses and small investors to work together you get more jobs. These regulations instead overload them with burdensome regulations that do absolutely nothing but increase muda.

These regulations protect the large and established businesses and banks. I have no idea why you would want to keep it that way unless you are connected to them.

[-] 2 points by RayLansing (99) 2 years ago

Good read, thanks Trevor. As long as the Republicons don't give a rats ass about people, people won't give a rats ass about them. Republicons are digging their own grave.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Yes they are. And please keep in mind this bill is getting passed with Bipartisan support.

Both parties work fro the 1%. One party is just much more obvious about it.

[-] 1 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

Ah, its the libertarian idea that giving the rich more money means that they will magically want to hire more people. What actually happens is that Maserati, Jaguar, and other luxury product manufacturers are going to receive more orders this year.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Lulz so true.

It's also the republican idea... and a little bit of the democrat politician idea... considering this and other deregulation has passed with bipartisan support.

It's very easy to blame the republicans because they are so much to blame... but don't forget about all the D's that voted for this bill too as well as the Bush tax cuts..

Both parties work for the 1%. One party, the republicans, are just much more obvious about it.

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

Oh yeah, neither party is off the hook on this one. We need more people to wake up, so that we're not stuck choosing between the lesser of two evils yet again.

I would love to see everyone voted out, and non-party-affiliated average Joes to take their places. The average white and blue-collar workers could do a much better job than this Congress has done.

[-] 0 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/08/fact-sheet-american-jobs-act

You mean the "Jobs Act" described at the above link? Wasn't that the President's Plan?

If you don't mean that "Jobs Act", then provide a link to the bill so that people can read about it and decide for themselves....unless of course, there is a fear that they might actually think it is a good bill if they actually could read it instead of just what those with an agenda say about it?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

No no no. The bill you're talking about is from 2011.

HR 3606 is the republican's Jobs Act my post is referring to. I've read the bill. At no point in time does HR 3606 create a job.

Don't make assumptions. It shouldn't be that hard to google the republican jobs act. Much different than Obama's American Jobs Act from 2011. This article is about something that recently passed in 2012, so how could it be the bill you linked from 2011?

Read the bill here - and I added this link to my post as well - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3606rh/pdf/BILLS-112hr3606rh.pdf

You could have also called my congressman to get the bill information.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

Read the bill and called my congressman.......(why would I call yours?)

The White House, and Republicans and Democrats in Congress alike support this bill.

President Obama has said, "'It is time to cut away the red tape that prevents too many rapidly growing startup companies from raising capital and going public." I couldn't agree more.

Did you note the number of sponsors and co sponsors on this bill? It might actually be the first really bipartisan bill since January 2009.

And since small businesses are responsible for most of the job growth in the US, this bill will create jobs by allowing more small businesses to expand and hire.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

And Clinton also said the Financial Modernization Act of 1999 was a great idea and the regulations needed to go to help things flourish... and it passed with bipartisan support. Then the financial collapse happened because those regulations were stripped.

Read between the lines.

Both parties work for the 1%. Both parties love helping out the banksters. Both parties are pro-war.

Also what jobs does this bill create? A bunch of Congressmen are saying this will create jobs. What jobs is this bill creating?

That's my entire point. It's all a ruse. It's really just deregulation and they're passing it with a subversive tactic.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

Its limiting previous regulations that did not allow small businesses to easily "go public"; these restrictive regulations stopped many small businesses from getting the capital they need to expand and hire. Going public allows people to invest in the company (you know - people who are saving for their retirement with 401k's and other investing strategies); the investors funds then are used to grow the business which means.....jobs.

When the small business becomes a large business, they will come under the regulations that all other large businesses are under.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Like I said... that's the kind of stuff they spewed out during the Financial Modernization Act.

We can agree to disagree on this but I suggest reading this article again.

Why would you trust a bill written by far right republicans?

[-] 0 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

Even the left agrees that this was truly a bipartisan bill and admits they can't figure who wrote it - despite what you write about it being written by far right Republicans.

Are there issues with this bill that I don't like? Of course there are..for example the 1 billion dollar limit - if this is truly a "small business" bill than that it far too high a limit.

And the fact that companies can "split" into two in order to crowdfund again - but there is an amendment in the senate that would tackle this one.

Anything to help small business grow and create jobs needs to be approached with bipartisanship as well as caution. When only 55% of people aged 16 - 25 are employed.......I think we need to look at this very closely before we simply say we are against it.

[-] -2 points by AlBundy (8) from Atlanta, GA 2 years ago

The left agrees that you are a load your mother should have swallowed.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 3 minutes ago Are you allways this stupid or is today a special occasion? You white trash inbred cocksucker. [-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 40 minutes ago Hey dickbreath Milton Friedman was a filthy cocksucker. Laugh at that you white trash pillow biting motherfucker. [-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 14 minutes ago If ignorance is bliss you must be the happiest motherfucker on the planet. [-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 34 minutes ago My dear friend I wouldnt trust a punk like you to sit the right way on a toilet seat. Any similarity between you and a human is purely coinc [-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 56 minutes ago You sound llike the type that would crawl through a perfectly good whore house to get to a fat boys ass.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

And you prove the point made by many....that when you can't win a debate, you resort to insulting the debater....grow up please.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

You're debate used is just a rehash of the stuff they used during the Financial Modernization act which had bipartisan support and was even liked by Clinton. It turned out to be some of the worst legislation in history as it is what helped lead to the financial collapse and the many crises we've seen over the years.

Watch Inside Job too. Or just read about the crises online.

Sadly we will only see who is wrong in the years to come as more problems occur or don't occur, which is your claim. My guess is it's going to be you who is wrong. Read the article again.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

Not just the Financial Modernization Act. The 2006 postal act as well.

You can read about how bipartisan that was...

http://www.nalc.org/postal/reform/paea_2006.html

It was sponsored by two Republicans and two Democrats and was supported by all the postal service worker unions. It took over a decade to get passed but when it did, it was a unanimous voice vote by the Senate.

Because of the unintended consequences of that act - in that it required pre-funding of pensions - it is now considered a right wing act simply because it was signed under the Bush Administration. But at the time, it hailed as a success story.

With every law that is passed, there will be unintended consequences. Unfortunately, Pelosi was quite correct when she said that we needed to "pass the bill to see what was in it". She was of course referring to the Health Care Reform Bill, but look at the recent costs coming out of the CBO on that - they are much higher than what was "intended" when it was passed.

My point is ultimately this....every time we buy into the propaganda put out by those who wish to keep us divided (left vs right) and say that the "left" is responsible for this and the "right" is responsible for that, we simply help them keep us divided.

No bill is 100% perfect - all of them have unintended consequences. When we all decide to focus on fixing those consequences instead of demonizing the other "side", then maybe we'll get somewhere.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

[-] 1 points by Concerned (425) 8 hours ago

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 3 minutes ago Are you allways this stupid or is today a special occasion? You white trash inbred cocksucker.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 40 minutes ago Hey dickbreath Milton Friedman was a filthy cocksucker. Laugh at that you white trash pillow biting motherfucker.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 14 minutes ago If ignorance is bliss you must be the happiest motherfucker on the planet.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 34 minutes ago My dear friend I wouldnt trust a punk like you to sit the right way on a toilet seat. Any similarity between you and a human is purely coincidence

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 56 minutes ago You sound llike the type that would crawl through a perfectly good whore house to get to a fat boys ass.

Like I said....grow up please

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Go away. Al Bundy doesn't talk like that. You're an impostor.

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 3 minutes ago Are you allways this stupid or is today a special occasion? You white trash inbred cocksucker.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 40 minutes ago Hey dickbreath Milton Friedman was a filthy cocksucker. Laugh at that you white trash pillow biting motherfucker.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 14 minutes ago If ignorance is bliss you must be the happiest motherfucker on the planet.

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 34 minutes ago My dear friend I wouldnt trust a punk like you to sit the right way on a toilet seat. Any similarity between you and a human is purely coincidence

[-] 1 points by AlBundy (0) from Atlanta, GA 56 minutes ago You sound llike the type that would crawl through a perfectly good whore house to get to a fat boys ass.

Like I said....grow up please

[-] 0 points by AlBundy (8) from Atlanta, GA 2 years ago

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you`d had enough oxygen at birth?

[-] 0 points by ironboltbruce (371) from Miami, FL 2 years ago

#OWS #Occupy Protested, #Anonymous Hacked, #WallStreet Responded:

#NDAA #SOPA #PIPA #ACTA #PCIPA #HR658 #HR347 #HR3606

Any Questions?

https://twitter.com/#!/WatchFrogsBoil/status/185013956677599233

[-] -3 points by VantagePoint250624 (-51) 2 years ago

How can anyone post such falsehoods?

Democrats DO NOT EVER vote for anything republicans draft and of course, are the epitome of both honor and integrity so there is no way even money will persuade them to be unfaithful to their sole mission of doing what is best for The People.

If this really does not create jobs, AND I MEAN GOOD ONES, like the hundreds of six figure congressional staffers each elected forces citizens to pay for, then there is no way that OWS's beloved Dems, or Obama (D), will assist it's passage.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

You better reread that conversation where you mistakenly gathered that I said I was a welder. You'll be enlightened to learn that I never said anything like that.

[-] -3 points by VantagePoint250624 (-51) 2 years ago

No, I don't think "better" do any such thing.

Do you partake of substances that others near you may suggest get the better of you?