Connect with us

Economy

Bursting the jobs numbers bubble

Published

on

Well, I really don’t want to burst anyone’s bubble. After all, when I get good news, the last thing I want is to see another episode of Adam Ruins Everything and suddenly what I thought was great news is only going to be marginally beneficial … maybe. Before I get started, though, I want one thing to be crystal clear: I am not an economic wizard. As a matter of fact, I don’t want anyone to think I am even slightly good with economics, especially on a national scale. But I don’t think I have to be; common sense should be enough.

Since before President Trump’s inauguration, he has been making deals. What started with Carrier back in late November, 2016, with the “saving of 1000 jobs” as it was reported, jobs numbers have been on a positive move. As an aside, the NYSE and other markets began a steady trend upward on November 9, 2016 that has continued a generally positive movement. Things look good and we are not yet tired of winning. Right? Let’s analyze what over 1 million newly added and filled jobs means.

First, I really hope for the best and for these jobs (and the markets) to continue the positive growth. The recent proposal to immigration in favor of American workers will certainly help growth, both in jobs and the economy. Bringing talented individuals to partake in the American dream is something we all embrace. Innovation and work is good for them, for us, for America and ultimately for the world. First, however, the immigration bill, or RAISE Act, must become an actual piece of legislation; second to be voted on and, third, signed into law. Expect a lot of push-back from the Democratic Liberals on why this legislation is bad: its racist, Islamophobic and “too cosmopolitan” for the globalist elites, are my guesses. I expect 6 months or more before the RAISE Act is actual law and, most likely, part of a larger immigration reform package.

Since January, 2017 the jobs numbers have surged. Not small numbers, massive numbers that, frankly, the Democrats probably find disappointing because they haven’t been able to achieve these growth rates in … well, decades. And President Trump has only been in office for 6 months. Obama’s 1st year in office witnessed the loss of 5 million jobs. In October, 2010, we saw those numbers begin to return with an additional 5 million over his tenure for a total of 10 million. That is roughly 1.67 million jobs per year, from October, 2010 through October, 2016. At this rate, under Trump’s watch, he should be able to easily match if not surpass Obama’s numbers.

The big difference is that Trump didn’t have to make up for lost ground. He started his tenure in office gaining jobs. Now, I’m not discussing whether or not Trump can actually be credited with the gains. Frankly, I don’t care who gets the credit. The problem is that the gains for the American worker, as it stands now, will be minimal. Sure, we feel better when we are working and earning our way, providing for our family and able to make a vacation or two at some point in our lives. But we still have massive issues that are, quite simply, going to erode any good these jobs numbers project.

There are two glaring problems that the Gutless Old Party has yet to accomplish: 1) tax reform, and 2) repeal of Obamacare.

We still need tax reform. If we want corporate America to succeed, they need incentive – taxes and repatriation are two items that must be addressed. For the individual, so what if I have a job. I’m still paying exorbitant taxes. I have been promised tax reform and I want to see it before the 2018 filing season. Oh, and by the way, it would be beneficial to anyone wanting to keep their job on Capitol Hill to make tax reform retroactive to January 1, 2017.

We still have Obamacare. This piece of legislative and regulatory disaster has been most responsible for inhibiting growth in the public and especially the private sectors. Are we still going to have the IRS looking over our shoulders to make sure we have that burden securely fastened to our backs? Am I still going to be fined a penalty if I don’t have Obamacare?

And, finally, what really grinds my gears (thanks, Peter, for that) is that our Republican President says we need an addition $50 billion in this year’s debt ceiling and “we will reduce that to $30 billion next year.” Wait. What? I thought we were trying to limit government spending. Am I going to be able to go to the grocery store and tell them I have opted for an increased debt ceiling? No. And don’t give me this “reduce to $30 billion.” You aren’t reducing anything. You are increasing the debt ceiling by $80 billion over 2 years. And do you think I am naïve enough to believe that it will stop there?

All these jobs are necessary. We have the government’s subsistence to upkeep and that popping sound you heard was the button on the Fed’s fat pants. Yes, once again, our “conservative” Republicans in Congress are just as liberal with our tax dollars as the Democratic Liberals. The difference is who gets to be in control of the purse and spend the money. What is obvious is that two Liberal parties exist. They simply have different ways they want to spend our money.

David is a Christian, a husband, father and patriot. He loves the fundamental first principles of the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As a full-time student at Regent University (online), he is earning a BA in Paralegal Studies with the intent to continue on to law school at the University of Texas, Austin. Whenever possible, David argues for the principles of natural law with whoever will listen. David lives in Georgetown, Texas with his wife, Mandy and two children, Ethan and Meredith.

Economy

With McCain out, Republicans can only afford one ‘No’ vote on tax plan

Published

on

With McCain out, Republicans can only afford one 'No' vote on tax plan

Things were looking very good for the GOP going into the week. Both Senators Marco Rubio and Bob Corker had signaled they were voting for the tax bill, leaving three undecided Senators to contend with Monday. Now, Senator John McCain is likely to miss the vote as he travels to Arizona for brain cancer treatment.

That means for the Republican plan to pass in the Senate, no more than one Republican Senator can vote against it. If two vote against it and every Democrat does as well, the vote would be 50-49 against, rendering Vice President’s tie-breaking vote unnecessary.

Averting a government shutdown is also on the table this week, though McCain’s absence won’t be as important since there will likely be Democrats helping to keep the government running, if only for a short while.

Further Reading

Sen. John McCain back in Arizona, will miss vote on GOP tax bill

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-mccain-arizona-brain-cancer-treatment-miss-gop-tax-plan-vote/Republican Sen. John McCain returned home to Arizona after spending several days in a Maryland hospital recovering from side effects from chemotherapy treatment for brain cancer, CBS News has learned. He will spend the holidays with his family and will not be on hand for the final vote on the GOP tax passage expected this week. He’s expected to return to Washington in January.

Late Sunday, a dual statement from McCain’s doctor and his office described the senator’s current health situation.

Continue Reading

Economy

Socialism, ‘socio-economic rights’ and Net Neutrality

Published

on

By

Socialism socio-economic rights and Net Neutrality

Given the Socialist-Left’s proclivity for control and deception, it’s is not surprising that they tend to disguise these tendencies behind deceptive labels [e.g. Affordable Care Act]. The term ‘Net Neutrality’ is no exception, with it’s labeling making it sound like a wonderful idea, while in practice it has the opposite effect, as it with most of the Left’s socialist national agenda.

The Socialist-Left also tends to overly complicate issues to muddy the waters, such as when an MSNBC host became angry as a ‘Net Neutrality’ opponent obliterated his Leftist narratives. [Courtesy of The Right Scoop]. There have been many an article explaining the issue here, here, here and here.  As well as FCC chairman Ajit Pai detailed the issue on Fox and Friends the other day:

FCC chairman Ajit Pai provided a perfect rebuttal to the net neutrality hysteria running rampant from the nation’s Left. He detailed the restoration of the ‘Light-Touch’ approach to the internet that has seen it flourish for 20 years. He also explained that the free-market approach is the best way to ensure innovation and cheaper prices for all.

Rather than trying to delve into the technical nuances of ‘Net Neutrality’ let us take a look at another case of government interference in the marketplace. This hails from the socialist ‘paradise’ of Venezuela as detailed in The Caracas Chronicles where the “Bureau for the Defense of Socio-Economic Rights (Sundde)” escorted by rifle toting Guardia, force business owners to sell their goods at prices determined by the Socialist government of Nicolás Maduro.

As in the case of ‘Net Neutrality’ there are those who applaud such efforts without any consideration of property rights of others or the long-term implications to their Liberty and society in general. They gain the short-term advantage of free or cheap goods and services without considering that this heavy-handed government interference will suppress the free market. The businesses affected will either cut back on investment in their businesses or close altogether. This is all part of the pernicious nature of socialism, where there will always be those who somehow think they can get something for nothing based on the flawed logic that the world owes them a living just because they exist. Those who salivate at the prospect of free stuff have a tendency to forget about the long-term consequences of their actions.

In the case of ‘Net Neutrality’ regulation of private business discourages innovation and advantages the bigger players in the field causing higher prices and fewer choices.

The Bane of Shopkeepers | Caracas Chronicles

https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2017/12/15/the-bane-of-shopkeepers/On Saturday, December 2, for the fourth year in a row, the Bureau for the Defense of Socio Economic Rights (Sundde) went on an “inspection” of private businesses. They began in Plaza Venezuela, the Sabana Grande boulevard and, by Monday, they were close to Chacaíto. Escorted by the National Guard (GNB) and the National Police (PNB), they forced shopkeepers to sell their entire merchandise at a 50% discount.

People made lines almost immediately outside stores selling shoes, underwear, trousers, shirts, purses and even food. In less than seven hours, shops were emptied out.

It’s a lethal stab to many shopkeepers, since sales already dropped by 40% right in December, a period that usually has an important cash flow. The reason: exorbitant prices. A pair of sports shoes costs Bs. 800,000 ($7.7, at the current black market rate), far more than the average employee can pay, with the current minimum wage plus food stamps at Bs. 456,507 ($4.42).

The GNB officers stood guard in the shops as if products were food for refugees fleeing a war. With rifles close to their chest, they controlled the crowds and diffused the constant clashes among customers.

Shopkeepers in el Centro are expecting Sundde to drop by at any minute on their nearly empty shops, while employees face an ominous prospect for 2018. The operation in Sabana Grande is common practice for the regime now: they regulate prices, destroying production and restricting free market.

Photo: José Díaz, Caracas chronicles

Continue Reading

Economy

Chuck Grassley attempts to defend killing the estate tax

Published

on

Chuck Grassley attempts to defend killing the estate tax

Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa has his heart in the right place, but his delivery often falls short. The estate tax definitely needs to be abolished, but trying to sell the idea by invoking booze, women, and movies is probably the wrong approach.

Here’s what he said earlier this month:

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

Just because people aren’t investing doesn’t mean we’re spending every darn penny we have on booze, women, or movies. It’s time for the Senator to get his messaging fixed.

Source: The Hill

Grassley: Ending estate tax ‘recognizes people that are investing,’ not ‘spending every darn penny’

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/363039-grassley-ending-estate-tax-recognizes-people-that-are-investing-not-spendingSen. Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyGrassley blasts Democrats over unwillingness to probe Clinton GOP and Dems bitterly divided by immigration Thanks to the farm lobby, the US is stuck with a broken ethanol policy MORE (R-Iowa) said he favors repealing the estate tax, which the Senate tax-reform bill does not do, saying it “recognizes the people that are investing,” The Des Moines Register reported Saturday.

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies,” Grassley told the newspaper.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.