"Not only that, but during the most recent three years of the study -- 2009, 2010 and 2011 -- businesses were collapsing faster than they were being formed, a first. Overall, new businesses creation (measured as the share of all businesses less than one year old) declined by about half from 1978 to 2011." (read more)
***
"Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) on Tuesday blasted an Obama administration proposal to create up to 100,000 more guest worker permits for the spouses of foreign workers, calling it a plan that would keep 100,000 Americans from finding jobs."
“Fifty million working-age Americans aren’t working,” said Sessions, an outspoken critic of Democratic immigration plans. “Yet the administration is now going to immediately add almost 100,000 new guest workers to compete against unemployed Americans."
“Fifty million working-age Americans aren’t working,” said Sessions, an outspoken critic of Democratic immigration plans. “Yet the administration is now going to immediately add almost 100,000 new guest workers to compete against unemployed Americans."
Washington Post, The Blaze
72 comments:
Marxism works!
Viva Socialism, welfare, and a corrupt media complex in bed with it all for profit and family ego back scratch!
Shovel ready?
“Fifty million working-age Americans aren’t working,” said Sessions.
Actually, it's 58 mil.
When you consider that's out of a population of 268 mil of working age, you've got 22% unemployment.
Yeah, it's a Depression.
If you actually look at the graph the rapid decline starts in the Bush administration during the lead up to the Great Bush Recession.
BLAME BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bush!
We were assured, repeatedly, that summer of recovery, shovel ready and the ACA were all going to improve our lives and pivot to job creation and an economic renaissance. oops. Turns out economic Paul Krugmanism is a FAILURE.
Even under that dastardly Bush, unemployment hovered around 5-6% max.
Bush!
Some examples of the problems for a small manufacturing company here:
1) An aerospace manufacturing company near me is trying to move a few blocks to a new building. They have about a hundred good taxpaying jobs in an industry that the area desperately needs to hang on to. All they want to do is move the operation as is from one building over a few blocks to another - same operations, same zone, same authorities. For months, government regulators have been putting them through hell with demands for engineering intensive information and documentation unlike anything they ever needed before. They are in serious danger of having their operation shut down from nothing more than bureaucratic obstacles. Even a temporary shutdown could make them insolvent and out of business which would seriously hurt their customers and vendors as well.
This is entirely in the hands of a few local bureaucrats who could care less about all these people. Apparently, they have their neurosis to feed. When we move in a few months less than a 100 yards away, we face the same run of the gauntlet, and I'm seriously scared by the prospect of it. It could ruin us. For half the effort, I could send all my production to China and sit at home running the blender instead.
2) My worker's compensation bill doubled this year because I had a couple people abuse the system. Everyone knows they were taking advantage of it - them, their lawyers, and the insurance company, but here in CA the system is so bad that insurance companies rarely fight even obviously fraudulent claims. In CA if an injury is even 1% work related and 99% not, then the claim is valid against the employer whose insurance must pay for it all. Now imagine how many non-work related soccer or furniture moving injuries find a way to fit that rule.
There are many more issues, but that's just two I dealt with this morning. In fact, my main job has become dancing with government regulations. I used to invent things, and build them, and look for new opportunities. Now I mostly work at staying out of trouble, and avoiding lawyers and regulators. Not real productive, but mandatory and expensive.
If we never elected that Bush character then none of this stuff would be true. I'm always amazed at how powerful he remains even today. Obama must get tired of being bossed around from Texas. I wonder if he ever tells him: "Heck of a job, Barry!"
Gee, I wonder what happened just two years after 1978. Apparently a Marxist named Ronald Reagan and his revolutionaries achieved power and implemented marxism, so sayeth commenter #1.
Bag's complaints have a lot of merit, I'd bet. Just speaking for a fraudulent insurance issue I had to go through on the East coast, a few kids pushed their friend into the back of my car as they jawalked across the street while I idled in front of the intersection. They tried to blame me supposedly backing into them, and set up some kooks across the street to intimidate me into believing they caught it on video. Long story short, the lawyer they retained asked for damages 5 times in excess of some low policy limits I'd bought (yes, my fault), and the insurance company came close to giving up fighting on a claim based on two chiropractor visits and no visible injuries.
I tried mightily to retain my own lawyer and after hearing several give up and technically correct my allegation of "fraud", I finally found a really nice guy who acknowledged the "cottage industry" of fake shake-down claims like this and billed me only $250 to argue their phony "damages" down to 2 grand.
Think of how much this fucks up the system. I'd bet at least 15% of yours and everyone's auto insurance price is a built-in factor to counter bullshit like this.
I asked a businessman friend a related question, successful, oldest guy I know. Past retirement still works as salesman. Flies all over the place, but oddly, I learned makes only one sales call a day.
?
HIs way of staying busy and focused and alive, I suppose.
Following my disappointment in learning I cannot participate in Amazon's associate program on my food-related blog. I intended to finance an upgraded camera that way. I'd use the camera for the blog mostly so decided to have the blog pay for it if possible. But as Colorado citizen the program is denied. This is Amazon's fault more than Colorado. Amazon was unwilling to negotiate terms. So blanket denial for states that give them any lip. But that did cause me to become bitter toward State interference to little programs like that.
Colorado wants their mitts on tax for anything that moves in the state.
The point that I made was quite cogent, I think. At least the guy had no good answer for me. It did shut him right up. He is solidly Democrat and for all regulations they dream up. He denies any problem with new healthcare laws interfering any way with his own carpet supply business. He's an expert in wall to wall bullshit.
Who would want to even consider starting a business these days? I asked. Forget my Amazon complaint. Who would want a partner like that?
The worst kind of partner imaginable. Not an investing partner. Not a silent partner. Not an absentee partner. Not a co-working partner sharing your trials and tribulations. Not a partner interested in your company's growth. Rather a partner who is also partner is your competitor's business too. A partner who is partner in everybody else's business too. An utterly conflicted business partner who makes all the rules and changes them at will as they go. A partner continuously snapping the rug from under you. A full on anchor of a partner, locked in at the hip, regulating your every move, demanding you fill out reports for them. A partner who taxes your activities, taxes every aspect of your activities, each of your activities along with everyone else. A partner with thousands of sub-partners, all utterly banal in their efforts. A partner that forces you to fill out forms for them on a regular basis then sends someone out with list of compliances, each item can ruin you or shut you down.
I had in mind the marijuana startups. So many of them actually willing to enter that mess. Risking at any moment their whole world crumbling and fined and arrested and jailed besides. Who would be willing to do that? I am curious about who would do that so I ask them. They turn out to be nice people and willing to speak. Their desire to provide pot and profit from that, their love of the weed overcomes all of that. But I cannot see it myself. I think they're insane.
The children's lemonade stands being shut down were in the news at the time. Just overbearing regulating cunts all around. Swooping in even on children doing their classical Norman Rockwell activity. Boom! State regulated.
I saw a female state legislator on the t.v. station that covers local government and her speech for a bill contained this, "...we noticed activity starting there. (something innocuous) It needs regulation."
It needs regulation.
The first sign of any economic activity whatsoever and her first instinct is regulate! That is her mindset. Instant fury. In a split second my impulse was throw a brick at her head. Who in their right mind would want anything at all do do in that environment people like that create? And yet people do. That is what startups must overcome.
I shot off a few emails to governor, legislators, asking why they discourage economic activity, but didn't hear back. Why should they? Why respond to a crackpot like me? They don't give a flat shit about my minuscule Amazon disappointment.
Apologies for swears but those are the words the raw language I use to process this sort of thing.
Bureaucrats Gone Wild!
If Republicans are seriously as in favor of small business as they've been when it comes to making regulation favorable for large corporations, they should put their money where their humongous mouths are and do it. But I have a suspicion that we've made things so easy for large corps over the years, that the economy as a whole is now irrevocably skewed in their favor.
A congressman in NC just got in trouble for advocating a "divide and conquer" strategy between supposedly deserving beneficiaries of govt help (the disabled) and supposed moochers. If only they'd bothered to realize all these years that their pointed attention to big business came at the expense of anything benefiting the small business owner then maybe we wouldn't be where we are now.
Don't blame the people in office when this happened because IOKIYAR!
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
If you actually look at the graph the rapid decline starts in the Bush administration during the lead up to the Great Bush Recession.
If you actually look at what happened, it was caused by Willie inventing subprime mortgages, so it's the Great Democrat Depression II.
Rhythm and Balls said...
If Republicans are seriously as in favor of small business as they've been when it comes to making regulation favorable for large corporations, they should put their money where their humongous mouths are and do it. But I have a suspicion that we've made things so easy for large corps over the years, that the economy as a whole is now irrevocably skewed in their favor.
When Ritmo says, "Republicans", he means what Chuckie Schumer calls, "our Republicans".
ie, RINOs, Whigs, etc.
But, if Ritmo is troubled by "making regulation favorable for large corporations", he need look no farther than his own Little Messiah.
30 years of Republicans did a lot of damage, says eduardo, so try 30 more years. we just didn't realize they weren't "real" republicans. surely we can try 30 more years of "other" republicans to see if they're pure enough to do the job the others didn't. what's 60 years in the lifetime of a nation? Isn't it worth at least a try?
No one ever gives republicans a fair shake. Why should people think 30 years is enough? So unfair. No one should ever get less than 30 years to try to succeed at a job.
Converse to regulation aversion, it was pure delight reading Washington Post's employee cafeteria shut down. Rat poo everywhere, chemicals stored with hand soap, wrong temperature storage, no thermometers to check temperatures, broken appliances, encrustation on ice machine, double tray food storage among the findings.
An editor whinged.
Commenters let 'em have it.
No sympathy whatsoever.
Everyone gleed. It reminded me of a breakfast near my previous apartment. Cheap place for breakfast. Bums walk in all the time, so suitable for myself.
The had the best (worst) report I ever read that included this:
Same spatula used to flip hamburgers used to swat cockroach.
I laughed writing that. It's still funny to me. I cannot believe the inspector actually saw that. Yes I do. No I don't. Yes I do.
I find myself in the odd position of agreeing with Ritmo.
Where he goes wrong is in thinking that the Democrats are any different or any better.
Crony capitalism, or cartel capitalism, is the agenda of both parties. Both parties are dedicated to suppressing competition from small businesses and startups.
Both parties are dedicated to suppressing the earning power of the middle class. They just do it in different ways.
Our managerial/professional class is out of control, and that is without respect to political identification.
Leftists always blame corporations.
There is no corporation bigger and no special interest larger than the government - local and national.
No corporation can do what the government does. The government can ruin lives and livelihoods and kill access to livelihood and does so on a daily basis.
The GOP attempts, at the margins, to stop the madness. The GOP is often kicked to the curb for doing so. That icky tea party, and their horrible attempts at a smaller accountable government. Damn them. The leftocrats, corruptocrat progressive leftists and some in the old guard GOP do not want to stop the gravy train and graft. It's all about power and pocket stuffing.
I know first hand what the leftists in our local government do to stifle and kill start-up business. I see all the time.
Most people have no idea what is actually going on out there. Bagoh does.
Rhythm and Balls said...
30 years of Republicans did a lot of damage, says eduardo, so try 30 more years. we just didn't realize they weren't "real" republicans
Ritmo knows those were the go along to get along Rs, working as assistant Democrats, allowing the Demos to wreak their usual havoc on things.
When you're that eager to ignore the facts, your case is really lousy.
But that's always been a problem for Lefties like Ritmo.
Those damned facts keep getting in the way of all those lies.
Show me the Democrat that is in favor of smaller government in the corporate welfare, or regulatory intrusion, or any other form other than having less Republicans, and I'll vote for that Democrat.
~From a life-long Dem. who has not ever seen such a Dem. since I first registered in 1976 - the last time I voted for a Dem. (Carter). I learn quick and I learn good.
Yes, Eduardo! Once the Democratic Party is outlawed, then and only then will Republicans be able to carry out their true mission! We've never heard caveats like that before in great nations.
Bag's issue is he doesn't recognize that even Republicans will never proclaim themselves to be against all regulation. He says "intrusive" though as the obligatory adjective, as if all regulation is intrusive. And I'm sure it is. Traffic laws are intrusive, even. The SEC - intrusive. Not polluting? Intrusive!
But somehow painting with a broad brush like that hasn't managed to promote less intrusive regulation. Well, maybe if I said I was against everything and didn't identify the truly bad things that everyone would agree with me were bad, and actually went too far, then I'd get nowhere on my quest also.
But demagoguing is like that. You have to make broad, sweeping, rhetorical generalizations or you can't excite enough people. Or even yourself.
Any corporate susidy you'd like to scrap, BTW, I'm all for going along with. I seriously doubt anyone here can name a single corporate subsidy that I'd favor retaining.
Ritmo's opened the muscatel.
Here come the non sequiturs.
I always like to stand back and watch his straw man burn to the ground.
"If Republicans are seriously as in favor of small business as they've been when it comes to making regulation favorable for large corporations, they should put their money where their humongous mouths are and do it."
No one makes regulation favorable for large corporations... they try to make it hard for large corporations but large corporations can afford legal and accounting departments so the regulation falls, as always, on middle sized and small businesses...
Always.
And we try to point this out and try to argue for less regulation or saner rules well... someone might get away with something and the pitchforks come out because OMG someone might get away with something so... the impossible labyrinth stays, or even gets added onto with a few more twists and turns and the whole of it falls on middle sized and small business AGAIN.
Unexpectedly.
And we try to point this out and try to argue for less regulation or saner rules well... someone might get away with something and the pitchforks come out because OMG someone might get away with something...
I never hear a saner rule or regulation proposed though all I hear is "destroy the department of education!" and "The EPA is horrible!" and "Dodd-Frank is a disaster!" so again we get a lot of bluster and war rhetoric without much light to all that heat. I know it riles the troops and cons love military metaphors but maybe acknowledging the good of what an organization should do without relying on destructive scorched earth approaches would be saner and more productive. But what do I know? I'm just a stupid non-conservative. I guess I get no say in the country. Just go to political war with me and then wonder why a productive result was not obtained. I guess some people think wars are the only ways of clarifying and improving things, though.
Rhythm and Balls said...
I never hear a saner rule or regulation proposed though all I hear is "destroy the department of education!" and "The EPA is horrible!" and "Dodd-Frank is a disaster!" so again we get a lot of bluster and war rhetoric without much light to all that heat
Ritmo never hears it because he doesn't listen.
A frequent malady on the Left.
And, of course, the idea that said rule, agency, or law is as bad or worse is an issue he's afraid to discuss.
Better to scream the people who say so are insane.
It worked so well for the Russians.
Yes Eduardo it's a real malady of the left to actually listen to Rick Perry compete for the mantle of Most Militant Government Destroyer in the GOP debates and forget which 3 federal agencies he wanted to get rid of - at least a couple of which I'm pretty sure were in there.
And then there was also Ron Paul, a popular one who wants to do the same.
But apparently the problem of the other Republicans was being too much a bunch of moderating "RINOs", as you put it.
You're obsessing on my comments, again.
And now retreating into questionable Cold War analogies.
As I said, militant rhetoric is the best kind. It's all just rhetoric after all, anyway.
Never a fact, with you.
Since you could have named an actual proposal along the lines of what you insisted existed.
And that would allow us to analyze its prevalence and popularity, illustrating your point.
But then, you might actually have one.
I think I'll be like Eduardo tonight.
And write in haiku format.
It helps reinforce the "rambling" style,
that he appears to prefer,
when talking to me,
or at all.
Thank you, Ed.
One line at a time.
One line at a time.
That's the cadence,
thats the rhythm.
It helps us minimize,
and remember the
important things.
And not get distracted,
like those snotty intellectuals,
and their "points".
So useless
they are.
Of course all regulation is not bad. Nice silly straw man there. I'll tell you some regulation I like a lot, and the current administration has no interest in adhering to it. It's called The Constitution, and it regulates regulators, and it's being ignored.
though all I hear is "destroy the department of education!" and "The EPA is horrible!" and "Dodd-Frank is a disaster!
Then you either aren't listening or ARE only listening to the slanted "newsspeak" that gives you what they want you to hear. Try looking and listening to more than one source outside of the mainstream media (and that includes FOX, before you get your panties in a wad)
Look...I don't give a flying f*ck who has created this untenable business environment. I put the blame on both parties and mostly on the insiders who have more to gain by taking bribes...I mean listening to lobbyists, than creating modest regulations over what SHOULD BE a free market. Follow the money.
The reality from the perspective of a small business owner, several times over, is that you are out on a limb. All by yourself and you are trying to create something. Unfortunately, behind you on the tree are the toadies and bureaucrats who are diligently trying to saw off the limbs that you are balancing upon. Below....they are also cutting away any safety nets.
Until you can argue from the position of someone who has put it ALL on the line for your business. Who every single day has to start from zero......
Shut The Fuck Up.
Everybody in Texas is smarter than the smartest person in D.C., even if that person calls their friends in CA for help with the answers. Smart is as smart does.
Again with the generalizations and rhetoric, Bag. You could have mentioned a single one.
Constitutional law is decided by SCOTUS rulings and interpretations. It's a process that generally works pretty well. Someone shows cause that the gov't violated their constitutional right by bringing a suit and the SCOTUS hears their case.
So we get a SCOTUS more dominated by conservatives in history (ideologically strong and articulate ones, at that!), and still complaints that Obama's actions are not being restrained, 30-years of Republican-dominated politics not getting the desired result either (or apparently leading to disaster, depending on whom you talk to), and, well, Democrats are horrible since they somehow must be responsible for this.
I have a serious question, and that's when it will be when Republicans will ever take responsibility for anything. It's like the Christianity of political ideologies: Our sins don't count because we sacrificed another party, leading to our being absolved of them.
Just call it the "anti-responsibility party" already!
Rhythm and Balls said...
Yes Eduardo it's a real malady of the left to actually listen to Rick Perry compete for the mantle of Most Militant Government Destroyer in the GOP debates and forget which 3 federal agencies he wanted to get rid of - at least a couple of which I'm pretty sure were in there.
As we all know, he was on pain killers for his back operation, but the fact there are so many that many people agree should go makes no never mind.
That Rick Perry could remember 2 out of 3 makes the whole idea null and void.
As I said, the muscatel's out and the non sequiturs are coming fast.
I can understand righties being down on the Dems for abortion or guns or gay marriage, on these issues the Dems really don't do what you want. But the economy? After the Great Recession? After Greenspan? After the massive housing bubble? After turning a budget surplus into a deficit? How much did you want to fuck it up before someone else was put in charge?
Wow. Did ed just hold me responsible for Perry's inability to remember the departments he wanted to abolish? (As if that was even the point. The point was what he wanted to do).
A challenge to the crowd: Name one thing that Republicans should be held responsible for.
Bet'cha can't.
After the massive housing bubble?
Created by CRA a Democrat invention that created the bubble. I lived this as a lender.....don't get me started.
After turning a budget surplus into a deficit?
PROJECTED surplus.
Economics 101 should be a required course for participation in political actions and discussions. I know it would really help our clueless legislators.....if they could possibly understand the principles.
That is too easy for objective people:
Bad intel [from a Dem appointee btw at the CIA] that led Bush to pull the trigger on the Iraq War.
Horrible execution of the Iraq War.
Failure to rein in fed spending and size of fed govt.
These led to the Obama victory in 2008 and so we continue under the exceedingly stewardship of a below average president [which we have now had for 22 straight years since 1992].
I put the blame on both parties and mostly on the insiders who have more to gain by taking bribes...I mean listening to lobbyists, than creating modest regulations over what SHOULD BE a free market. Follow the money.
Yeah, well there are laws favored overwhelmingly by one party that led to this and SCOTUS decisions overwhelmingly celebrated by one party that codified it and there you go. And, that last SCOTUS ruling made tracking the money even more difficult to do, leaving the trails shadier and more inscrutable, while upping the sums needed to spend (and secure from bribes) to do so.
But Democrats need to be blamed. Because, they need to be defeated.
DBQ you should read Bruce Bartllett's book 'Imposter.'. He predicted most of the outcomes of Bush and Greenspan's policies. After that you can spout your little irrelevant homilies.
Well, at least you honestly name two things, AJ, but still I find it interesting that despite emphasizing Bush's decision to go to war (and I don't even know that it was the worst move) on someone else's intel. Presidents get intel of all sorts and it's their job to sift and weigh the importance of the reports, though.
But that's a minor quibble. At least AJ's being honest.
DBQ is right that Democrats had their hands all over the housing bubble (and the greater crisis), too, though. That's completely true. The repeal of Glass-Steagall required left-wing support and signatures.
So why can't we fix those things now?
Jeff Sessions, (KKK Alabama).
Yes, put him in front of a microphone.
He will definitely win over the rest of the country.
Or perhaps try another redneck cracker from the South-totally winning pubes!
AJ Lynch said...
Bad intel [from a Dem appointee btw at the CIA] that led Bush to pull the trigger on the Iraq War.
You. Can't. Be. Serious.
Cheney. Cheney. Cheney.
Rand Paul knows the score.
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
I can understand righties being down on the Dems for abortion or guns or gay marriage, on these issues the Dems really don't do what you want. But the economy? After the Great Recession? After Greenspan? After the massive housing bubble? After turning a budget surplus into a deficit? How much did you want to fuck it up before someone else was put in charge?
Again, it was the Demos that did all that.
Singing, "La la la" (like someone at TOP), doesn't change that.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Wow. Did ed just hold me responsible for Perry's inability to remember the departments he wanted to abolish? (As if that was even the point. The point was what he wanted to do).
No, Ritmo is the personification of irresponsibility.
And Ritmo's only point is that he wants to avoid it.
A challenge to the crowd: Name one thing that Republicans should be held responsible for.
Letting the Choom Gang go this long without impeachment?
It's confession time. I do blame Democrats going along with late-1990s financial "reforms" for the crisis. People still can argue about the role that played but I don't see a reason for not being conservative about it. We didn't have a crisis that big all those years it was in place.
Or maybe they can be refined more lightly. Who knows. Appease all these "Dodd-Frank sucks!" crowd, a bit.
It's confession time. Ritmo confesses. Democrats got Clintonian funding-fever. I never understood where they thought it would get them, in the end though.
"A challenge to the crowd: Name one thing that Republicans should be held responsible for."
Letting the Choom Gang go this long without impeachment?
Oh, there you go ed - right for the low-hanging fruit. That's how progress is made... with sweeping, revolutionary, wholly unpopular and ineffective changes. Make sure to bring a guillotine to the hearings, as a little toy prop of course.
Eduardo and President Biden. Two men with a common vision.
Actually, I don't think even Biden's stupid enough to want to be president. But ed's got a solution, in need of a problem.
This long silence is leading me to believe that the wholly un-hyperbolic Ed is taking responsibility for the elevation of President Biden to power.
I know, I'm the personification of irresponsibility (or so he says). But we really do need to give ed credit for his single-minded focus and purpose of vision when it comes to his steady hand in bringing about the Joe Biden Administration.
You've got to hand it to the guy. He's got some vision. And none of it would be possible without me being responsible for everything he doesn't like.
Ed, don't be shy.
Please tell us more of your awesome plans for the reform of American government.
The edutcher-Joe Biden Administration is sure to be just the tip of the iceberg on this one.
Don't let us down. Please tell us what other crafty plans you have hidden up your sleeve.
ed apparently is too busy designing the website for the President Joe Biden Administration to reply.
It's kind of like when Romney's campaign hastily released a website on election night as an access point for everyone interested in helping his "transition team", but with the difference that ed's plans are sure to work.
Come on, ed. You don't have to take responsibility.
We're giving you credit!
Ok, I'm off to stream another episode of Cosmos.
I'll leave ed to ponder his future role in the President Joe Biden administration.
Say hi to Joe, ed! Heard he's a great guy.
Interesting Ritmo is now trashing Shotgun Joe.
Will he kiss the Messiah on both cheeks next?
@ Ritmo
Well, some people have to go to bed to get up to go to work and make something happen every day.
Walk a mile in MY shoes, mother f*cker Then, we can talk about it.
Oh wow. That was a great comeback, ed.
What have you gotten angry about now, DBQ?
Ritmo doesn't do analogy, does he?
ARM - you have no idea how the real world works. You read some blame game bs book and you feel you're an expert.
You're NOT.
April Apple said...
You read some blame game bs book
If you actually read anything outside the bubble you would know that Bartlett was making predictions regarding the inevitable outcomes of Bush and Greenspan's economic policies, not blaming.
Reality, ARM.
"President Obama and his fellow Democrats are always berating those spitefully obstructionist Republicans for their supposed lack of focus on job creation and their persistent retarding of the slowest economic recovery, evah because of their — well, actually... it’s tough to tell what, exactly. Something about how Republicans won’t go in for making employment more expensive and inaccessible with a higher minimum wage mandate; or for hiking our out-of-control deficits with more stimulus boondoggles and unsustainable entitlement programs; or for raising taxes so the government can take more capital out of the private sector and better “invest” and redistribute it; or for their endless efforts to disable/do away with the administration’s unwise and ungainly takeover of the entire healthcare industry. I don’t even know.
But if Democrats cared to put a little more of their own focus on actually growing the economy, they might want to reconsider the gargantuan expansion of the regulatory state that’s gone down under President Obama’s direction. While we often pay most attention to the Federal Register, the Competitive Enterprise Institute points to the record of final and permanent rules in the Code of Federal Regulations as another measure of that regulatory expansion — and it ain’t pretty.
And yes, the general trend through the presidents has been an ever-heavier regulatory hand — President Bush’s eight-year average was 2,490 — but this is an insane uptick. ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, the EPA, and so much more red type, and Democrats still seem confused about why their policies haven’t been able to boost business, hiring, and economic growth. Go figure."
- Erika Johnsen
The left will never reconsider their adoration for crippling punitive and crony-boosting regulations that slam the door shut on prosperity and new business.
Regulations are just awesome.
since you respond to graphs, ARM -
This Simple Graph Compares Reagan’s and Obama’s ‘Recoveries’
Libs like ARM and Ritmo don't really believe that most of the commenters here are conservatives who would support real reduction in the federal govt, a balanced federal budget and support getting the feds out of state/ local responsibilites like schools and we oppose most if not all corporate welfare and we want the vast number of welfare programs reduced too.
I'm all for lessening federal involvement in schools (at least the standards nonsense that they've meddled in), getting rid of corporate welfare (you already got Clinton to "reform" regular person welfare by imposing restrictions) and reducing the debt and deficit in boom times (and not during devastating financial crises). So the difference is I seem to notice that a Democratic president did two of those things while none of the Republicans have.
Whatever cons (like AJ) say they want, I think they suffer from too much pride to note that only a Democratic president actually did a few of these things. I think if times were different the current president would do at least one of those things also. But with partisans of a certain stripe, it's not necessarily the priorities (and certainly NOT whether the times allow for them) but whether they could proudly point to one of their own getting the opportunity to do those things - even when they haven't lately at all.
It really does seem to come down to partisanship. But I want a pragmatist over a partisan and I'm not seeing many in the GOP. The last one was Huntsman and we all know how far he got. His voice just didn't offer the volume and his unpragmatic zeal for ideology didn't match what the people controlling his party clamor for.
Shorter April: "Let's pretend 1980 and 2008 were equivalent economic scenarios."
You have to be anti-economics to believe that they were.
I guess I'm supposed to believe that Bartlett has less credibility than an un-credentialed professional partisan hyperventilor on Hot Air.
Post a Comment