Forum Post: Please help
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 8, 2011, 8:39 p.m. EST by JQcitizen
(125)
from Houghton, MI
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
This will help with jobs if we can get a good turnout. It only takes a minute...
http://www.sherrodbrown.com/petition/w1110jobsg/?gclid=CKvL-p61qKwCFQGFQAodkFnr-w
EDIT-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's been a lot of debate about jobs bills but the point of this post is to ask people to join with Sherrod Brown to ask the republicans and the tea party to stop blocking jobs bills or to put up a real jobs bill of their own.
A lot of people think that because Boehner calls a trickle down tax break to the rich a jobs bill it is so. That's been going on for a decade and the jobs haven't happened yet.
I hope many of you who read this post will sign on to the letter and help pressure the GOP to do something besides pose.
Dear Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell,
President Obama’s jobs plan would put millions of Americans back to work–unless you hold those jobs hostage.
Ending Medicare as we know it and privatizing Social Security would hurt America. And so did the effort by members of your caucuses to demand those things in ORDER TO PREVENT THE U.S. FROM DEFAULTING ON ITS OBLIGATIONS
We need jobs, not more hostage-taking. And we won’t stand for another effort to block progress unless you get your way on Medicare and Social Security.
If you don’t agree with the President, propose a plan that will actually create real jobs. But we won’t let you hold these jobs hostage.
Sincerely,
I'll sign that.
In fact, I just did.
Thank you. Added a thousand names since last night. Please spread the word.
Dear Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell,
President Obama’s jobs plan would put millions of Americans back to work–unless you hold those jobs hostage.
Ending Medicare as we know it and privatizing Social Security would hurt America. And so did the effort by members of your caucuses to demand those things in ORDER TO PREVENT THE U.S. FROM DEFAULTING ON ITS OBLIGATIONS
We need jobs, not more hostage-taking. And we won’t stand for another effort to block progress unless you get your way on Medicare and Social Security.
If you don’t agree with the President, propose a plan that will actually create real jobs. But we won’t let you hold these jobs hostage.
Sincerely,
I signed the petition but I was disappointed to see the very general request for donations. Was that a campaign contribution request for Brown? Or was it to specifically further the fight with the GOP in congress on jobs?
Please sign the letter at this site. Pass it on.
It might create some short term jobs but it will also destroy better jobs. You can see the jobs "stimulus" creates what you can't see is the jobs it destroys. The money for this has to come from the economy which could put it to better use. We need less government spending not more, we need less regulations not more, we need lower taxes not more. Why is this even an issue???
That's FUD. Plain and simple there's no stimulus and there's no jobs. In fact the job creation numbers since the Bush tax cuts are exceedingly low. So unreasoning fear about losing jobs is just not borne out by the behavior of the so-called "job creators."
check this out
I'd sign a petition to raise taxes if they went to paying for some of the things we're already doing. The main bulk of it, from what I've heard Obama say in his speeches, is to essentially send money to states to pay the salaries of public employees. Our biggest problem has been overspending at all levels. Cut what you can and tax more, but stop spending what you don't have.
Lots of economists believe that we need to spend right now. The point has been ably made by far better than me that the present "overspending" complaint is a bit of a red herring.
If we don't get the economy going again, the degree of indebtedness will be moot. In time we will certainly need to address it but not at this moment. We will need to restructure and evolve eventually.
Fine taxes can wait a few years until the economy improves. There is an economic theory that the Great Depression was made worse by government and, as counter intuitive as it may sound, the best course of action for the government would be to do nothing. I don't pretend to know what's best. The two economists that proposed the theory are definitely in the minority, but the majority isn't necessarily right.
The economy is bust because of the credit and housing bust. That was brought to us by the Clinton Administration that forced lax credit standards on the banks so more people could own homes. Then the lax regulation of financial institutions by Clinton and Bush while the financial institutions created derivative instruments by bundling mortgages that were not credit worthy. The housing bubble popped and all came tumbling down. The so called trickle down tax policy has nothing to do with it. The deficit spending for wars, healthcare etc has put us in such a deficit, that if you confiscated all the wealth of the 1% it would not even make a dent in our country's debt. Not even a dent.
The job bill is just obama playing politics to get votes. He is campaigning not leading
The jobs bill is A political game being played by Obama. It is not enough! We need real reforms.
Its more than the less than nothing that the GOP is offering.
I agree, that is why OWS needs to move to washington to inspire change
There are hundreds of congressional offices across the nation. Both representatives and senators have local offices. It is not necessary to go to the expense of getting large numbers of people to commute to Washington. In fact its better to have actual constituents camping on the doorstep of their elected members.
Like Jerry Nadler in downtown NYC?
Yes.
Nadler voted to repeal Glass-Steagall and he deserves to be confronted for that betrayal of the public trust.
SEE: 64 U.S. Senators & 171 Sitting Representatives who repealed Glass-Steagall http://occupywallst.org/forum/64-us-senators-171-sitting-representatives-who-rep/
True it was a democratic president who supported and signed it, am i correct?
It was bi-partisan.
Most important it was a REPUBLICAN CONGRESS under Newt Gingrich that created the law. The official name of the law is "The Gramm-Leach-Bliley financial Services Modernization Act". Three REPUBLICANS.
Yes i was not blaming any one party, both were at fault on so many levels.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs are a start and make a different in the economy. More is better, but why is that a reason to turn down a half million or more? uh...1.9 million.
Obama is on the campaign trail playing politics, instead of working to develop a comprehensive plan to turn the economy around. He lacks the experience to create change. I voted for him once but not again. The change i can believe in is to get him out of the White House.
Obama - No More Years!
That's right, keep it to a number you can count.. ;^)
And which parts of Obama's jobs bill are you in agreement with? in particular?
This is what I agree with:
"Ending Medicare as we know it and privatizing Social Security would hurt America. And so did the effort by members of your caucuses to demand those things in ORDER TO PREVENT THE U.S. FROM DEFAULTING ON ITS OBLIGATIONS
We need jobs, not more hostage-taking. And we won’t stand for another effort to block progress unless you get your way on Medicare and Social Security.
If you don’t agree with the President, propose a plan that will actually create real jobs. But we won’t let you hold these jobs hostage."
Do you think something is wrong with that or, do you believe that scrapping all regulations and giving bigger tax breaks to the 1% will cause more jobs to be created?
EDIT: All of the GOP "jobs" bills are summed up in the question above. Trickle down VooDoo economics. It didn't work for Reagan, it didn't work for Bush and it won't work now."
That wasn't my question.
And according to the White House- "The White House doesn't create jobs".
This is a letter to congress!!!
It is about refusing to act to address our serious economic decline. Are you opposed to that?
It is opposed to holding entitlements hostage.
Most importantly, it ASKS THEM TO PROPOSE A PLAN OF THEIR OWN.
Those are what this thread and that letter are about. If you are interested in talking about this thread then, what part of that are you opposed to?
If you can't read for comprehension, how do you arrive at "just the facts?"
It doesn't look like you are genuinely interested in discussion of the topic, so there really isn't any point corresponding with you. You are welcome not to sign. Bye. Talk to the hand now.
"This morning, the Speaker’s Office released a list of 132 American economists who support the Republican approach to job creation laid out in the House GOP’s Plan for American Job Creators. To date, the House has passed 22 bipartisan jobs bills that follow the GOP plan, yet these common sense bills are stalled in the Senate by the #ReidRoadBlock. If the President and Senate Democrats are serious about lowering unemployment and getting Americans back to work, they should stop playing political games and take up these 22 bipartisan jobs bills."
http://majorityleader.gov/Blog/
See, YOU are misinformed about the number of jobs bills the GOP has proposed. You are spewing propaganda about "holding entitlements" hostage. The DEMOCRATS have consistently blocked ANY attempts to correct our "serious economic decline". Go read the voting records of the US Gov yourself before posting more lies.
Please explain what this link is and about before I click it.
Sorry Karenpoore. I copied the text below.
It takes you to a petition for Obama's jobs bill.
It says:
"AN OPEN LETTER TO JOHN BOEHNER AND MITCH MCCONNELL
Dear Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell,
President Obama’s jobs plan would put millions of Americans back to work–unless you hold those jobs hostage.
Ending Medicare as we know it and privatizing Social Security would hurt America. And so did the effort by members of your caucuses to demand those things in ORDER TO PREVENT THE U.S. FROM DEFAULTING ON ITS OBLIGATIONS
We need jobs, not more hostage-taking. And we won’t stand for another effort to block progress unless you get your way on Medicare and Social Security.
If you don’t agree with the President, propose a plan that will actually create real jobs. But we won’t let you hold these jobs hostage.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown"
We need to do what we can to help those that are jobless ASAP.
We also need to hold the do-nothing congress accountable for obstruction for political goals at the cost of suffering among the people.
Granted, it would take a lot of signatures to get their attention, but really, it's quick and easy. We should try.
How much do the dems pay you to be a stooge for them? I hope a lot. Look at you helping the dems co-op the OWS movement. I'm ashamed of you.
I'm not a democrat. I am against what is being done in congress. Quite simply I am not "for" the democrats, I am against the republicans who obviously serve the 1%. I support OWS.
As each day goes by more people will be hurt. I am against that. I can't sit by and watch the republicans play politics with people's lives.
Once again, I am presenting you with the quote of what I am in favor of:
This is what I agree with:
"Ending Medicare as we know it and privatizing Social Security would hurt America. And so did the effort by members of your caucuses to demand those things in ORDER TO PREVENT THE U.S. FROM DEFAULTING ON ITS OBLIGATIONS
We need jobs, not more hostage-taking. And we won’t stand for another effort to block progress unless you get your way on Medicare and Social Security.
If you don’t agree with the President, propose a plan that will actually create real jobs. But we won’t let you hold these jobs hostage."
Do you think something is wrong with that or, do you believe that scrapping all regulations and giving bigger tax breaks to the 1% (the republican "jobs" plan--voodoo economics) will cause more jobs to be created?
NOTE: Trickle down, VooDoo economics. It didn't work for Reagan, it didn't work for Bush and it won't work now."
You can try to divide us but you can't. We are growing.
You can't be just against the repubs. They are putting on a show!!! Both sides are equally corrupt. They are ALL getting rich, sacking the US treasury. Vote both sides out in 2012.
Corruption and greed exist in any society. It's the lawmakers responsiblity, not corporations to enforce rules, and our politicians have run amok. It's time to kick them out.
This is simple. The repubs have an agenda. I judge them based on what they are doing and on what they are not doing.
After 10 years of voodoo economics, propping up more of the same and calling it a jobs bill is obscene and shows utter contempt for the electorate.
As for the Dems, show me some alternatives. I am independent.
You DO realize that the Dems had control of the House and the Senate for the ten years before the Repubs took the house back last year?
BTW you might look here... http://occupywallst.org/forum/republican-jobs-plan/
Some facts. The Dems only took back the house in 2006. Prior to that the Repubs controlled both house and senate. (Note all you right wing right-to-lifers: how come abortion is still legal...? They held executive, legislative, and you can argue that the Supreme court was also republican.)
http://articles.cnn.com/2006-11-07/politics/election.main_1_electronic-voting-machines-democrats-senate-house-results?_s=PM:POLITICS
"After 10 years of voodoo economics, propping up more of the same and calling it a jobs bill is obscene and shows utter contempt for the electorate."
My bad. Still, of the past ten years, the "blame" is shared equally between parties. As for abortion-Roe Vs. Wade might be a clue.
No the blame is not shared equally. The republican president with control of the house and senate made massive tax cuts that cut income to the government. then he started 2 wars that were massive expenditures that have been a drain for over ten years.
Plain and simple there wasn't much anyone could do. If a dem didn't support, he was unpatriotic...the blood of 9/11 was on his hands. That is what the republicans did for the term in which they had total control. Spent us blind.
As for the abortion, they constantly teased the religious right that they were "pro life" but when they had control, that was not the agenda. Right now there are bills in congress to try to circumvent Roe v Wade. That's because they are looking to use the religious right again. You never saw any such Bills when they could easily have passed them! They are just using right-to-lifers. If they ever delivered to them, then they would not have a handle on them any more. Since the Bill failed in Misssissippi yesterday, they feel safe it can't pass anywhere, so it's a good vehicle to stir up support, without ever having to deliver anything on.
And Obama has spent as much as Bush did in half the time it took Bush.
In fact, according to new data released by the Treasury Department- "in the less-than-three-years Obama has been in office, the federal debt has increased by $4.212 trillion--more than the total national debt of about $4.1672 trillion accumulated by all 41 U.S. presidents from George Washington through George H.W. Bush combined."
As far as those wars go-maybe all of those Democrats should have voted NO instead of YES?
And wasn't it President Obama that was seeking for MORE $$$ to fund Afghanistan just last year? And wasn't it Obama that authorized Libya by completely bypassing Congress? Ummmmmyeah.
The republicans, who were bragging how they deregulated everything, deregulated wall street and wall street then used the new freedom to tank the economy. Under Bush we were told they were "Too Big to fail." Now we were held hostage and Bush paid the first ransom to the banks. Much of that money went overseas to Europe! Obama inherited this mess and had no choice but to follow through, which he did.
You can't pin the bailout on Obama. That's just dishonest. We got here by the republicans plain and simple. Moreover, the longer the unemployment crisis lasts, the more revenue we lose. So the block of any progress on the economy by the republicans over the last three years has further contributed to the debt. It's just another form of strapping the government for cash. In the end they ask us to cut social programs because we can't afford it (thanks to their overt actions).
The Dems couldn't vote no and you know it if you were old enough to be aware at the time. If not, use your imagination. It was a dilemma.
Afghanistan had an expiration date and we have reached it. Any expenditure was short-term and would have been focused on improving our end-game. Doesn't matter now. We are coming out. It is sure not the same thing at all.
We went in (Libya) as part of NATO. That's a commitment we made long ago. Unlike Bush we did not go it alone, we did not do it all, and we finished quickly. Oh, and we were successful.
-------------------------------------EDIT----------------------------------------------
My bad. Misspoke about Afghanistan. We are coming out of Iraq.
We aren't coming out of Afghanistan totally. On June 22, 2011, President Obama announced that 10,000 U.S. troops would be withdrawn by the end of 2011. An additional 23,000 troops will leave the country by the summer of 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/world/asia/23prexy.html?_r=1&hp
Nonetheless I still believe he wants the money to improve our end-game.
"President Bill Clinton Admitted His Policies Regarding Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Paved The Way For Current Financial Crisis. “Clinton … said that Democrats weren’t entirely blameless, stating that they should have highlighted problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and ‘tried more aggressively to regulate derivatives.’ He also acknowledged that there was possible danger in his administration’s policy of pressing Fannie Mae, the mortgage company, to lower its credit standards for lower- and middle-income families seeking homes. ‘I think, through the lens of this, it looks like that was true,’ Clinton said.” (Walter Alarkon, “Clinton Rejects Blame For Financial Crisis,” The Hill, 9/25/08)
And Former Clinton OMB Chief Put Fannie Mae In The Business Of Buying Sub-Prime Loans, Resisting Proper Government Oversight. ”Under Raines’s watch, Fannie started a pilot program to buy subprime mortgages and began buying home loans with no-money-down financing … According to a report by Fannie Mae’s regulator—The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (O.F.H.E.O.)—Fannie Mae’s lobbyists tried to insert language into an appropriations bill that would have reduced O.F.H.E.O.’s funding until its chief regulator, Armando Falcon, was fired … [W]hen former congressman Richard Baker (Republican of Louisiana) called for a stronger regulator in 2000, Fannie Mae responded by calling his constituents, eliciting an avalanche of letters complaining he was trying to ‘raise mortgage costs.’”(Bruce Feirstein, “100 People To Blame,” Vanity Fair, 9/25/09)
Clinton Also Signed Repeal Of Glass-Steagall Act That Allowed Banks To “Run Into Trouble,” Leading To Their Bailouts. “But 10 years later, the end of Glass-Steagall has been blamed by some for many of the problems that led to last fall’s financial crisis … the huge banks born out of the revocation of Glass-Steagall, especially Citigroup, and the insurance companies that were allowed to deal in securities, like the American International Group, would not have run into trouble had the law still been in place …” (Cyrus Sanati, “10 Years Later, Looking At Repeal Of Glass-Steagall,” The New York Times, 11/12/09)
And one question-why didn't Obama "fix it all" when the Dems had control of the House and Senate and White House for two years? The Republicans could NOT block anything, and he did nothing. Of course maybe it's because:
"Because In 2008 Election Cycle, President Obama Was The Largest Recipient Of Donations From JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Citi Group, AIG, Morgan Stanley And Bank Of America, Raking In Over $3,456,000. (Center for Responsive Politics, OpenSecrets.org, Accessed 4/16/10)"