Seeking Alpha

Former GE CEO Jack Welch rips Pres. Obama's support for a millionaire's tax as "a transfer...

Former GE CEO Jack Welch rips Pres. Obama's support for a millionaire's tax as "a transfer payment. You take it from one pan, put it in the other. It doesn’t work." On the administration: "They are spenders... They don’t believe jobs come from the private sector. They believe government creates jobs."
From other sites
Comments (150)
  • twelliott
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    F***ing A. Jack your spot on!
    6 Oct 2011, 05:59 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    GOP believe you create jobs by laying off Americans working for $14 hour and moving their jobs to China. CEO's then make millions and pay record low taxes, while workers are left to live on food stamps and look for that $8 hour now job.
    This is the new " North Mexico" Conservatives dream of.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4558) | Send Message
     
    twellliott -

     

    Welch and you willfully neglect to consider1946-1970, a period generally characterized by explosive growth and rising prosperity, which for the US followed the Great Depression and the unparalleled public debt caused by wartime expenditures. It was also characterized by a steeply progressive income tax program frankly designed in significant measure to redistribute wealth to the low and middle income segments of society and provide those segments with social programs to engender health, education, pensions and other foundations of a modern, productive and engaged work force and to pay down the public debt over time.

     

    Would that a similar bold set of initiatives be adopted now.
    6 Oct 2011, 10:51 PM Reply Like
  • twelliott
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    You forget to realize that the war did just end and there was an expanding work force and an entire world that need to be rebuilt.
    7 Oct 2011, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Well then Jack, let's quit taking it from the middle class pan and putting it in the upper class pan.

     

    Is it any wonder a gazillionaire would be against taxing their gazillions?
    7 Oct 2011, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    tweliott, your absolutely correct and everything bob adamson said we did, set the stage for us to be able to rebuild the Europe and Japan.

     

    Too bad the "Greatest Generation" isn't here to make it happen again. But, the Party of "NO" would be the first to tell them it couldn't be done.
    7 Oct 2011, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4558) | Send Message
     
    twelliott -

     

    There is today "an expanding work force and an entire world that need to be rebuilt" as well. Think Latin America, the former Soviet Bloc, Southern Europe, China, India, Asia generally and Africa and the Middle East. Remember as well that through most of the late 1940s and early 1950s that most of the world outside North America, Australia and one or two other places was either exhausted from the devastation of the war, in turmoil attendant with decolonization or both.

     

    In short, there were many similar challenges and uncertainties in the post WW II world and now.
    7 Oct 2011, 02:31 PM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Rebuilding after WWII was a far cry from today. The US represented the majority of world GNP at that time which I believe was around 75% or some ridiculous number because nobody else had an economy. Cities were in ruins and investments were made to prevent starvation, stand up trading partners and hold back the red wave.

     

    Even if one would argue that there are investments to be made then what part of the thin air do you want to fund that from and what happens after the bridge/road is built? Where is the sustainability and competetive advantage? Never mind the strain on commodity prices.

     

    If perceived need created an economy then there would never be a poor country because their need would be natural economic stimulus. It is not that simple.
    7 Oct 2011, 06:19 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4558) | Send Message
     
    Hi Tomas -

     

    In the late 1940s the US sovereign debt level was very close to that today, much domestic productive capacity that existed was geared to war material production and needed further investment to be converted to civilian needs, most overseas markets, while desiring US products, lacked the money to make that demand effective and lacked operational productive capacity to produce export goods with which to generate money to buy US products. Further, there was an underlying concern in the US and abroad that the Great Depression would simply recommence in this environment. Add to this the political turmoil evidenced by the growth of domestic communism in much of Europe, South America and Asia, and attendant upon the collapse of several European empires.

     

    My point is simply that we should not make assumptions about the mood of the US private sector in the mid and late 1940s from the vantage point of our knowledge that they were on the verge of a generation of unparallelled expansion and prosperity. I would argue that, in fact, the anxieties and caution of the US private sector initially after WW II was not unlike that today.

     

    Some might argue that the US, like the US in 1946, is exhausted and essentially bankrupt and that it therefore is unable to fully benefit from the current opportunities the global economy now offers (i.e. like the UK in the 1940s and 50s, the US will now experience a hard and slow recovery compounded by the fact that Europe and Japan, arguably, now are suffering a similar fate). I suggest that the US, Europe and Japan, while each faces serious challenges, are better placed than they were in 1946. In other words, while the BRIC countries may have become more the engines of future global growth, global growth is not a zero sum game for each of its constituent parts and the US Europe and Japan have much to offer and gain.

     

    7 Oct 2011, 07:02 PM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Well if the US and Europe have much to offer than what is it? And is it big enough to drive growth up and unemployment down?

     

    These time periods are very different. War time brought shortages of consumer goods and delay of personal consumption. We were also the only engine of growth in the world. Not today.
    7 Oct 2011, 11:05 PM Reply Like
  • bob adamson
    , contributor
    Comments (4558) | Send Message
     
    Tomas -

     

    The US, Japan and Europe (and other advanced countries like Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Canada etc.) are each at the forefront of development of new scientific and technological innovation and the implementation and marketing of that technology. Consider where the hubs of development of new intellectual property are generally located. They lead in post secondary education and medical innovation.

     

    Consider also the importance of a sound legal system and the rule of law and then consider which countries are at the forefront in that regard. The same for capital markets and financial institutions. While creating and maintaining first class public infrastructure is a challenge fro all nations and economies, consider which countries are generally in the lead in that important area.

     

    All this is of great value not only to the citizens of Europe, Japan and the US but also add great value to many goods and services they sell abroad.

     

    This is not to suggest that these advanced societies do not face major challenges or that China, India and other emerging societies are not themselves making major strides to close the gap in these and other matters. It would be unduly pessimistic, however, to suggest that these advanced societies will necessary be consigned to the margins of future economic, social and political development.
    8 Oct 2011, 01:16 AM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Sounds great. Bring it on.

     

    Sorry for being the skeptic but the US has to move some really big numbers to drive growth and not much innovative has happened in the past 10 years unless we are referring to how people can get a home with no money down. What is invented here also ends up being manufactured in Asia. Canada and Australia are also heavy commodity producers not high tech unless we consider RIMM and that is a slow moving train wreck.

     

    It is not that it cannot happen but rather we need to do it on a very large scale.
    8 Oct 2011, 11:58 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    bob adamson

     

    It seems TomasViewPoint and twilliot are dues paying members of the Party of "NO" that I spoke about earlier, aka the Party of "Can't, aka the Party of "Won't".

     

    Yes, the world is very different now than after WWII. Let's face it the "Greatest Generation" had it easy. There was so much that needed to be done. Not like today. I mean, who needs American technology and know how today?

     

    Yep, I envy those guys. They just "waltzed" through Europe, Pacific, Asia, and every other piece of the world with ease. And then came home to a Nation so prosperous they just really didn't have to do anything. The world just beat a path to our doorstep and bought whatever we had to give them.

     

    And besides that they were just a bunch of Socialists. You know, send all the GIs to college, Social Security, a fair tax code that favored the middle class and young families. They supported Unions to advocate for workers rights and wages . Later Medicare, Welfare, and Voting rights.

     

    I Love each and everyone of them.
    12 Oct 2011, 12:43 AM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Mon

     

    You need a lot of classwork in a number of areas including economics, business, history, statistics and logic.

     

    But if sarcasm were intelligence you would not need anything.
    13 Oct 2011, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    coming from a man who negotiated his parachute package to include his newspaper payments and hotel accomodations for life .

     

    jack welch another ancient know it all .
    6 Oct 2011, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    Well at least he created jobs in the U.S. and added value to his company, unlike his successor.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (867) | Send Message
     
    It was Bill Clinton and government leadership that raised all boats.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Terry....did you forget about Clinton's free trade agreements that took your jobs offshore?
    6 Oct 2011, 06:26 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    good point .....and if he did not sign those agreements , im pretty sure he would be called a protectionist .which is a taboo to republican free trade talking heads.

     

    imo....free trade MUST be balanced trade .
    6 Oct 2011, 06:28 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Buy American!
    6 Oct 2011, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Agreed....Free Trade has allowed multi-nationals to outsource and off shore. It's responsible for a lot of negatives. Good to corporations who can send work to low wage countries....bad for American employment. Consider that the easy answer of shifting to low wage population centers has probably had an un-intentional consequence of stifling innovation in productivity.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Yea, GE the bail-out flunky of 2009. Capitalism at its finest. We place risky bets that profit and we win. We make risky bets that loose big and you taxpayers pay. Ahh, the corporation at it best..
    6 Oct 2011, 06:34 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    VMARKW,

     

    No,

     

    Terry forgot Clintion Signed the repeal of Glass-Stegal.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    And that was a mistake! But boy do I miss Clinton when the worst they could drudge up was intern sex.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • losbronces
    , contributor
    Comments (704) | Send Message
     
    Yes, Bill did a great job with the internet boom in full swing and having a Republican Congress in 6 of his 8 years in office.

     

    He also gave us the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act. That worked out well didn't it. In my opinion, he substantially aided the rise of China Inc. as well.

     

    The sad thing is, he wasn't anywhere near to being the worst president in my lifetime.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    So once again....can we point to ANYTHING that has been done by "We the People's" representatives in the last 12 years that one would call "good" for America. I'm wracking my brain. Nothing's coming?

     

    If we can't point to anything significant.....then can we only come to some other conclusion? Namely the politicos are not interested in doing "good" things for America. That's my conclusion.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    WM, they did help a lot of foreign countries rebuild after blowing them up. That has to count for something.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:53 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    J457.....does anyone know what is being done with the Iraq oil? I suspect we have "confiscated" it and are paying something less than market prices for it. I don't know that anyone, GAO, etc has ever done a report on it. Just saying....and BTW....blowing stuff up is like burning dollars in a bon fire.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:56 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    china and russia out bid us for the oil fields ....we got nada .
    6 Oct 2011, 07:02 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Anything to let people keep driving their 3mpg Hummers and big trucks. Send kids to fight in Iraq, borrow trillions to feed the war machine, blow up those oil producing countries, anything to drive the big truck. Energy plan you say; no we don't need that we just need to keep the oil pumping long enough to fill up the truck.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    i would if there was anything left manufactured here ...lol.
    7 Oct 2011, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    To reiterate, Bill Clinton out "Republicaned" the "Republicans. I think that's why they hated him so much.
    7 Oct 2011, 02:00 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Yep, those neocons love a good bon fire.
    7 Oct 2011, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1584) | Send Message
     
    It was Jack who cranked up GE Capital which led to the problems at GE.
    7 Oct 2011, 08:11 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    1980XLS forgets that a Republican dominated Congress passed the repeal of Glass-Stegal.
    12 Oct 2011, 12:51 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Yeah,

     

    And Clinton had a gun to his head.

     

    Give it up. It is not about. parties, but cronyism,

     

    They both suck. And so do you.
    14 Oct 2011, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • Cjhies
    , contributor
    Comments (141) | Send Message
     
    Terry, I suppose you believe that Al Gore also invented the internet and government loan requirements had nothing to do with the Housing bubble and melt down.

     

    And don't forget it was Newt and a conservative Congress that Mr. Clinton worked with and who passed the Balanced Budget Amendment and produced the first surplus in generations.
    13 Apr 2012, 05:35 PM Reply Like
  • joe kelly
    , contributor
    Comments (1776) | Send Message
     
    Then all his CEO cohorts demand government do something to spur job growth.

     

    His successor Wiemelt is on Obama's jobs committee. Are you people just ignorant hypocrites or is it just because you're a bunch of dupes fooled by corporations and Fox news that millionaires don't have enough money?

     

    6 Oct 2011, 06:04 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    You must be ignorant of constitutional property rights as well.

     

    It is 'their' money, not yours.

     

    And if you took all of it from them, it would not even make a dent in the debt.

     

    And, after you did that, then what?
    6 Oct 2011, 07:00 PM Reply Like
  • srrams76
    , contributor
    Comments (8) | Send Message
     
    Welcome to Prog World. Where success is scorned and indolence is idolized.
    6 Oct 2011, 08:04 PM Reply Like
  • joe kelly
    , contributor
    Comments (1776) | Send Message
     
    Whe GE ceases to use tax payer paid for roads and infrastructure to deliver it's products. When it ceases to get taxpayer paid for police and fire protection. As well as the corporate welfare it receives, then I'll sing it's praises. Till then, you're a dupe 1980 guy.

     

    You did know it was government sponsored research and investment that created the very internet you're duping for corporate America, don;t you 1980?

     

    Poor deleded fool you are.
    6 Oct 2011, 10:54 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Kelly,

     

    You need to go to public school, I think.

     

    Nowhere did I suggest nobody should pay taxes, nor that government has no role.

     

    Everybody should be paying some, and too many at all income levels are not paying enough.
    Likewise Government has a responsibility to spend it wisely and efficiently, a duty that is has failed at miserably.

     

    $16 Muffins, Anyone? One of a million examples for sure

     

    As far as GE, if you followed any of my posts and comments, you will find no bigger critic than myself,of GE and similar "Crony Connected" Big Business.

     

    http://bit.ly/hFyjLE/

     

    Businesses do, and should, pay user fees and or associated taxes associated with public infrastructure, from which the benefit and burden.

     

    Are you telling me GE pays no property taxes on their thousands of facilities and other assets? No License plates on their thousands trucks? No Tax on all the diesel and gasoline they buy?

     

    How about the dividends to shareholders.?
    Billions in Employer portion of Soc Sec & Medicare taxes.

     

    Spare me. GE plays plenty, but I do hate the Company due to it's incestuous relationship with Gov't.

     

    As far as income taxes, they have losses carried forward to use as credits, the same you would have on your own Capital losses for stock trades. You do trade stock don't you? Because this is a trading site not a political blog.

     

    As far as Corporate income taxes, You do understand, businesses don't pay taxes, only collect them and pass costs on to customers, don't you.

     

    Especially ironic in the case of a company such as GE, as the US Gov't itself is a big customer.
    6 Oct 2011, 11:49 PM Reply Like
  • John Cordes
    , contributor
    Comments (168) | Send Message
     
    You could instead stop Medicare and Social Security and that would not make a dent in the debt either, so what's your point? No balance because it might take a marginal 3 to 5% out your pocket after they pulled down their first million. That would be so unfare.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    John...you imply 3 - 5% as a marginal tax hit is fair... but you only say that because the number is small and because you "feel" it is fair. Can you otherwise suggest a logical reason that it is "fair"? What do you think is the "most" amount that a government should take (steal) from a worker regardless of how much the worker makes and why?

     

    It's very easy to use the word fair....just like kids who complain. Do you think the estate tax is fair? If so why? Do you think that anyone who participates in the system and uses government funded services should pay income taxes? Given all we have seen over the last 50 years, do you think that there is any amount of money that could be "extracted' from the wealthy that would make a difference to the poor? Or does is matter at all? Are the poor in their prediciment because of something else?
    7 Oct 2011, 10:29 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Okay, then let's all stop paying taxes. Hell, if the upper 2-5% don't have to pay, why does the middle class. We have property rights too. Then when we cut everyone's taxes we can join the "Third World Club".
    7 Oct 2011, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1584) | Send Message
     
    The $16 muffin turned out to be a mistake. The bill was $14 and change for a continental breakfast, rooms for various workshops and a main room for the meeting. Cheap actually. Just because Fox runs a story doesn't mean it's true. Probably means it BS in fact.
    7 Oct 2011, 08:34 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Isn't Welch the genius who built GE Capital that almost blew up GE in 08/09 and required the government to bail them out or virtually destroy the company?
    6 Oct 2011, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    bingo .

     

    they always forget that small facts.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Untrusting,

     

    Not to support Welch,

     

    But I think after 8 years or so, it should be considered "Jeffrey's Baby"

     

    More than enough time to unwind positions.

     

    I know, some of you will be blaming Bush after 8 years too.

     

    When will Obama own something? Please tell us.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:29 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    XLS,
    The answer is Obama owns everything since the day he took office and same with Immelt.

     

    You say 8 years is "more than enough time to unwind positions". Well that just isn't necessarily so. It all depends on how deep in the hole you are in is to begin with, how much damage has been done, and how intertwined the problem is with the larger whole.

     

    AIG has now been working for almost 3 years to unwind their derivative positions and they still are not finished. Yet in the bigger picture of AIG, the derivatives were a teeny tiny part of the whole AIB business and operation.

     

    If one looks at the Savings and Loan crisis back in the 1980's, it was big at the time, but very very small in comparison to the scale of the 08/09 financial meltdown. The S&L crisis was only something like $90 billion in losses and took the Resolution Trust something like 10+ years to get it done.

     

    If one looks at country defaults and bankruptcies like Argentina and others it can take decades to recover if they do so at all.

     

    Thus in GE's case, GE Capital was a core part of the business (don't have the exact number but it was a large part of GE and accounted for large parts of GE profit before the meltdown). It is no easy task to unwind a huge part of the business and a significant part of profits prior to meltdown. Could easily take many many years.

     

    Citibank is another prime example. It many well take C many many years to recover and ever get back to what they were before the meltdown. Of course Pandit cannot do that even in a few years. It will take much much more time.

     

    If one looks at Obama and what he started with from Bush, it should be no wonder that it could easily take many years and decades to attempt to recover at all. Take just a few of Bush's legacy:
    1) Many millions of jobs outsourced from 2001-2008.
    2) Two wars started with at least $2 trillion in debts not financed.
    3) Higher levels of government employees in 2008 than in 2001.
    4) A financial crisis that dropped GDP by about 5%.
    5) A total national debt that was about $4 trillion higher than when Bush started.
    6) A tax cut that had reduced federal tax revenues and increased future deficits yet not easy to unwind now.

     

    Even Houdini, Merlin the Magician, Zeus, and Superman all combined would have had a hard time just stopping the decline, much less getting much turned around. When one starts in a 25,000 foot deep hole it is just going to take a long long time to climb out, especially with just a spoon to dig a few foot holes on the wall up every few feet. Then add quite a few baboons pitching stones down a you every few minutes to try and slow your climb and you also just might take decades to get out as well.

     

    In short, bad as Obama is (and he is pretty ineffective) , nothing could ever be worse than Bush/Cheney and the massive damage they did to Americans and the american economy over 8 years. They could well go down in history as the worst administration in the 200+ year history of the US.
    6 Oct 2011, 08:54 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    While you were ranting about the same old "Blame Bush" stuff, you forgot to mention who signed the repeal of Glass-Stegal.

     

    Bush was too busy with his head up is ass over Iraq, to see the fire,
    Rubin, Summers, Greenspan and Clinton started.

     

    Sorry, Don't recall Bush outsourcing jobs either. Buffet & Immelt may have, but not Bush.

     

    BTW: it was Clinton that pushed NAFTA as well.

     

    As far as Afghanistan,

     

    Perhaps we should have done nothing in response to 9/11?

     

    Rather spend money Killing Terrorists & Taliban, than on Solyndra.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:40 PM Reply Like
  • Financial Insights
    , contributor
    Comments (955) | Send Message
     
    Untrusting,
    You forgot to mention Greenspan as a contributor to America's decline.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:48 PM Reply Like
  • joe kelly
    , contributor
    Comments (1776) | Send Message
     
    Or what reagan did to Khadaffi, sent a missle into that joker's living room, would have been a far better idea than the trillion or so we've spent on Iraw and Afghanistan.

     

    C'mon 1980. Reagan's your guy andf I have to bring up one of the few things he did right.
    6 Oct 2011, 10:56 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Sounds great. Too bad your not personally over in Afghanistan getting your butt shot off, instead of a bunch of poor kids from inner cities and small towns.

     

    And at least have the decency to spend your own money on killing terrorists instead of mine and millions of other Americans. We don't give a toot about what you spend your own money on, but we sure care about you wasting well over $2 trillion of our money and getting tens of thousands of fellow Americans killed and maimed. But we would sure be happy if you personally backed up your bs by putting your own butt on the line.

     

    The rest of us will be more than happy to defend ourselves when and if any actual terrorists show up to confront us. Don't think we would have any trouble whatsoever getting about 100 million other Americans to help us either.
    6 Oct 2011, 11:48 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Kelly,

     

    Sorry, to disappoint you, but I did not support GWB's Iraq War.

     

    A method more like what Reagan did to Gaddafi, would have been more appropriate and cost efficient. Agree withyou on that one.

     

    Agreed with Obama on Iraq and his position on Afghanastan.

     

    BTW, Obama's failed stimulus cost nearly as much as the entire

     

    Can you name for me the policymaker you support, that was opposed to going into Afghanistan please?

     

    Now, who's the extremist.
    Iraq War.
    6 Oct 2011, 11:58 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Andrew,
    No doubt about it. Greenspan and Bernanke have both been major contributors to America's decline. They are just key cogs in the dysfunctional political system that combines with crony capitalism, large corporate public companies, and various vested interest groups.

     

    There is plenty of blame to go around and would be almost impossible to name all the miscreants involved. Thus one can only name of few of the very worst. Certainly many from both parties, but the Republicans are perhaps even more diabolical, corrupt, and head the list. Certainly Democrats such as Larry Summers rank right up there with the worst of the Republicans. As is generally the case the worst of the worst, in both parties, are always involved directly in passing laws and regulations that directly advantage and benefit large corporate america and disadvantage the vast majority of average americans. Larry Summers and Robert Rubin were just corrupt, dishonest and self-serving Democrats that colluded with Greenspan and Wall Street to cause massive damage to average Americans and the american economy. But even at that they did nowhere near the damage that Bush and Cheney caused in the big picture.
    7 Oct 2011, 12:06 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Untrustworthy,

     

    I live in the New York area, and you are a coward.

     

    There is big difference between soldiers and innocent civilians.

     

    You apparently are clueless.
    7 Oct 2011, 12:11 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Untrustworthy,

     

    Agree, because what you said duplicates my earlier post, as far as all the culprits.

     

    Sure you did not just copy off of it?
    7 Oct 2011, 12:13 AM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    XLS,
    Truly a right wing nut job with nothing to offer but personal cowardice. A coward is someone who expects others to do his fighting and others to pay for his cowardice. A perfect description of yourself.
    7 Oct 2011, 12:14 AM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Hey Coward,
    I have written and commented on the CFTC and Brooksley Born vs. Greenspan, Rubin, and Summers scandal and corruption probably long before you were even on SA or even day trading markets.

     

    Virtually impossible that I would ever copy anything you might write since you seem to have little or no understanding of anything of significance.
    7 Oct 2011, 10:30 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    If you think this is Obama's economy, you don't have any understanding of how far the NOT SO FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS drove our economy off the cliff, or how high the cliff was.
    7 Oct 2011, 02:12 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    You very conveniently forget that it was the Republican Congress that passed the repeal of Glass-Stegal.

     

    Let's face it. Both Parties are to blame.
    7 Oct 2011, 02:27 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    1980, very well said.

     

    Real Americans don't forget 9/11......
    7 Oct 2011, 08:17 PM Reply Like
  • OVERBID2002
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    I get a kick out of Tea Party hypocrites that whine abut the "failed stimulus" but claim the solution is lower taxes. More than half the"failed stimulus" WAS lower taxes. But convenient memory loss is understandable with anyone who has their head up their ass.
    15 Oct 2011, 08:35 AM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    Hilarious!! Obama appointed as the head of the jobs committee the CEO that keeps outsourcing jobs......hope and change baby!!!

     

    By the way, Jack Welch is another crony just like Obama, Mozillo, Dimon, etc.....
    6 Oct 2011, 06:09 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    The government has created a lot of jobs......government jobs.....that's why we have $1.5 trillion deficits. What we need is FEWER government jobs.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:09 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    facts .....the government jobs have gone down 9 straight months .

     

    check the labor numbers .

     

    thats a fox talking point which is 100 % inaccurate.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:11 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    Wmarkw, very well said.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Wolverine....9 months...is that all? How soon before we get back to 2002 levels?

     

    And you can reduce their compensation by about 30% as well.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    We need more government layoffs, like 2M jobs next year. That would be something good for the US.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:19 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    just curious .....why were you okay with the government workers from 2000-2008 ? when did the light bulb go off that too much government workers is not a good thing .

     

    the fact is under obama govt workers have dropped off steadily since obama got into office and although i agree it was out of necessity rather then a plan ....it is what it is.

     

    my issue with the complainers about the govt jobs is just one ....
    WHY NOW ?
    deficits do matter under either party ......somehow when bush /cheney ran the white house , deficits did not matter.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:26 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    Let's at least start with a hiring freeze and, as attrition takes hold, find out just how much fat is on the carcass. As much as I'd like to see 2M less federal government jobs, the administration would probably ax the few productive ones there are.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:30 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    And Medi-Care and SS and 1 trillion in wars. The boomers legacy continues for at least two generations. How long does it take to apy off 15 trillion anyway.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:35 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Just when we start to control those Wall St bankers you want to de-regulate them again.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Only if they have replacement jobs in private sector. Otherwise it won't do anything except create higher UI tax and reduce tax revenue and spending. Think it through.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Well...they may not have mattered to some....but they did to me. I have been complaining for a long time. I didn't vote for Bush either time. I'm for bringing all the troops home. No reason for us to be involved. No reason for us to be in Europe, etc. Let them fend for themselves. Bush and Cheney were also elitists who were out to destroy the USA...That's the mantra, and it's been so for some time.

     

    So it's not just now for me. It's somewhat easy to understand how it wasn't a big deal to others either so long as the "economy" was roaring and everyone was doing fine. But that was all engineered by Greenspan....an elitist following the same mantra.

     

    I can pretty much say this....if there is a recommendation from the President, Congress or the Fed.....it's a bad thing for the USA.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Well they must be listening....here's a new vacancy at the Dept of Energy....let's hope they don't refill the position.
    "
    The top official at the Energy Department's loan program has stepped down in the wake of a high-profile failure of a loan to solar panel maker Solyndra, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.

     

    Jonathan Silver decided to leave because no significant new funds were allocated to the loans program after the fiscal year ended on September 30, the newspaper reported, citing a statement from Energy Secretary Steven Chu."

     

    Hasta La Vista Baby !!!!
    6 Oct 2011, 07:04 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    if i said ok to 2 million job decrease ...................will you promise to not blame the president when the unemployment rate jumps to 11 %.

     

    every action has a unintended consequence.

     

    im sure fox news and the gop will forgive the president for this bold move in reducing jobs
    7 Oct 2011, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1584) | Send Message
     
    Start reading the monthly jobs report. We lose government jobs every month, another 31,000 in this mornings report.
    7 Oct 2011, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    My mistake for the 2M number, it is too low.I think it would be better for states and the federal government to layoff around 4M-5M jobs next year.
    8 Oct 2011, 09:55 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Yep, they'd be on him like a pack of do nothing rats.
    21 Oct 2011, 10:13 PM Reply Like
  • bonehead69
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    Mark,
    I stopped frequenting this site when it became obvious to me that many of the comments have become baseless arguments and irrelevant to the investing thesis that was the "seeking alpha" theme. It seems that the populous majority out there is obviously listening to the wrong message, so my wisdom is not needed to fuel that debate. Why bother.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • tigersam
    , contributor
    Comments (1711) | Send Message
     
    Rich should pay the fare share.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Sam. Or at least as much as the rest of us. Say 35%.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:38 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Tigerscam,

     

    You should go back to school, and learn to read & write.

     

    You, are the poster child, for the failure of public education.

     

    BTW, the top 10% already pay 90% of all income taxes.

     

    47% pay nothing, while enjoying the fruits of this nation.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    No, that would be our Congress.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:48 PM Reply Like
  • heed
    , contributor
    Comments (13) | Send Message
     
    1980XLS,

     

    There should not be commas after "school", "You", and "child".

     

    Just saying...
    6 Oct 2011, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    I can tell you that 1980XLS is passionate...and when people get passionate about stuff, their fingers get twitchy and, well you know, a few extra characters creep in. That's why I don't have a concealed carry permit. I am a very passionate driver, and, well you know....it's self preservation....by now I would probably be in jail for shooting some other car's tires, lights, etc out.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:53 PM Reply Like
  • heed
    , contributor
    Comments (13) | Send Message
     
    Passionate is fine, but people in glass houses shouldn't make punctuation errors.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:57 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Heed,

     

    Agree with items 1 & 3.

     

    Not # 2 however, given the context of my thoughts.

     

    Should have proof-read my comments.

     

    Just Sayin'
    6 Oct 2011, 07:07 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    ....and "child."
    6 Oct 2011, 07:29 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    J457,

     

    You must have trouble with reading too.

     

    heed did mention "Child"
    6 Oct 2011, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1584) | Send Message
     
    47% pay nothing is an absolutely false statement and you know it.The top 10% pay 70% of income taxes, not 90%. That is because they have over 70% of the unadjusted gross income. Turn off Faux News, find your own information.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:02 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    1980XLS

     

    I don't know what Tigersam's first language is, but, I suspect you would never be able to master it as well as he has mastered English.

     

    BTW, the the top 10% control 93% of the wealth.

     

    47% pay nothing because they are poorer than S#!+. If they're enjoying the fruits of this nation, they're getting it from a dumpster. What don't you understand about that you (*&%*.
    21 Oct 2011, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    But none of them mentioned that you may be a poster child for a failed public education system. Or, maybe it is a good system and you just didn't pay attention.

     

    I don't think you paid attention.
    21 Oct 2011, 10:27 PM Reply Like
  • Financial Insights
    , contributor
    Comments (955) | Send Message
     
    Not all millionares are job creators, and not all job creators are millionares. That is why the argument "you will kill jobs if you tax people making over a million dollars" is illogical. Lower the corporate tax rate. I am sure people making over a million dollars a year can stomach paying 5% more in taxes. Cry me a river.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:45 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    Can't really disagree but our leaders may redefine a million as 100,000. Never know with these guys.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Mann,

     

    Don't disagree, perhaps they could pay more.

     

    And, perhaps they might be willing, provided they were confident it would be spent wisely, vs being used to buy votes via scams like Solyndra.

     

    In addition, if you taxed them 80% it would not even make a dent in the Budget.

     

    It's a fact, there simply is not enough of them.

     

    So all your demagoguery, is just drivel, not a viable solution.

     

    There are however, hundreds of millions that pay nothing, while enjoying the fruits of this nation.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • Financial Insights
    , contributor
    Comments (955) | Send Message
     
    "In addition, if you taxed them 80% it would not even make a dent in the Budget."

     

    This is exactly the kind of flawed argument that makes no sense, but a lot of politicians use it. Because taxing them at 80% won't reduce the deficit 100% we shouldn't tax them at all? Hey, well in that case eliminating the billions in oil company subsidies won't dent the deficit so let's just keep those, cutting waste from the defense budget, and welfare by themselves won't eliminate the deficit either so let's just not change them either. You can use that argument for pretty much anything that is in the budget. Only when you implement everything together will it make a difference.

     

    "There are however, hundreds of millions that pay nothing, while enjoying the fruits of this nation"
    I agree reform the tax code. Get rid of the EIC. Get rid of all of the mortgage interest deductions, and all the other useless garbage in the individual tax code. Give more funding to the IRS so that they can go after all of the fraudsters out there who scam the government for billions in tax fraud each year. However, forcing poor, and the lower class to pay "their fair share" when they do not reap anywhere near the benefits that the rich do, is ridiculous.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:58 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Did I say, not tax them at all?

     

    I even agreed, both they, along with so many other that pay nothing, should likely pay a little more.

     

    Poor don't pay anything, BTW.

     

    In Fact, 47% pay nothing.

     

    And no, Payroll taxes for a future underfunded entitlement to benefit themselves, does not equate to paying taxes to benefit society as a whole.

     

    So please do not use that as an example.

     

    Feel free to use the net debit from EIC and food stamps in your overall equation, defining "Fair Share"
    6 Oct 2011, 08:05 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    XLS,

     

    The Solyndra scam at a mere $500 million pales in comparison to the multi-billion dollar frauds, scams and donor payoffs to HAL, PFE, and many other crony capitalist friends of Cheney and Bush. Not to mention the trillions garnered by the military industrial complex in the Bush/Cheney follies and lies.

     

    The Republicans are a disaster and the Democrats are just as bad. The political system is broken. Neither of them will fix anything even if they were smart enough to figure it out, which is questionable at best.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:09 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Untrusting,

     

    Sorry.
    I don't recall using any party affilliation , nor individual politicians names in my comments., Other than Obama as a successor to Bush as Immelt is a successor to Welch.

     

    Any reference to Solyndra was due to it's "current events" status as an example of government waste in general.

     

    That said, I agree. Plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the aisle, of waste, fraud and abuse for decades.

     

    In summary, I never advocated not paying taxes either, so why do advocate for Zero Military spending, like too many angry liberals?

     

    Are you not any safer because of it. How much money did Obama spend cathcing Bin-Laden? Are you sayin g that was a waste of money too?
    6 Oct 2011, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • Financial Insights
    , contributor
    Comments (955) | Send Message
     
    You just went off on a tangent.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Not advocating for zero military spending, just a reasonable approach. Certainly the US military budget at equal to the entire rest of world's military budget put together is not reasonable nor sustainable without destroying the US. Maybe something like 50% of current level might be argued as reasonable and sustainable.

     

    As with all things in life and economics, it is a cost benefit analysis of what is the best use of limited resources. The short answer is no, it was not worth trillions of dollars to catch Bin-Laden. And no, we are not materially safer despite hundreds of billions or trillions wasted on so called security. Bin-Laden would have eventually been caught, as they all always are, without two wars and massive military deployment and trillions wasted.

     

    BTW, am totally apolitical. Neither party is worth a crap. It truly is a Hobson's choice of who is least worst and least damaging for average americans. Best and probably only solution is some type of a third political party or perhaps citizen uprising.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:51 PM Reply Like
  • Economic Analyst
    , contributor
    Comments (2531) | Send Message
     
    There is nothing in the Constitution that says we need any Parties, nor does it provide for rights of Citizenship granted to unliving entities such as Corporations. It provides both for the common defense against all enemies, foreign and domestic, as well as the general welfare. The priorities as understand by many it are Life, liberty, ad the pursuit of happiness, in that order. Oh yes, and the power to issue currency on the full faith and credit of the Treasury. So many partisan agendas, so little time!
    7 Oct 2011, 11:12 AM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    that 47 % ..do pay sales tax , property taxes , renters tax ,and payroll taxes ......stop the fox news talking points its getting old.

     

    ill make it easy .....just tell the rest of the country how much do we have to put in the " job creators " pockets before they can hire someone . just give us a number .....is it 100 billion ..a trillion ?

     

    corporate america has CASH ....lots of it . balance sheets are flush with green . the greatest lie being told is this uncertainty BS.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:07 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1584) | Send Message
     
    Or Oracle settling with the government for overcharging...couple of hundred million..just what Ellison and crew got caught on....likely a fraction of what they didn't get caught on...
    7 Oct 2011, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Nothing like having everyone pay income tax to sober up the thirst for handouts. How taxes are distributed is another arguement but everyone should pay.
    7 Oct 2011, 11:08 PM Reply Like
  • petyaczar
    , contributor
    Comments (282) | Send Message
     
    The 50% -now- who pay no federal income tax are economic freeloaders when it comes to paying personal income taxes.. they pay ZERO,,, riding in the wagon while yelling "pull faster, pull faster" to those 15% of taxpayers who actually bear 100% of the federal income tax burden

     

    The solution is to put in a Federal minimum income tax in which every person,, man woman and child, citizen,resident,illegal alien diplomat ,tourist who is in this country for more than 60 days pays a
    minimum personal federal income tax of $10per person per month

     

    Thats a mere $120 per person per year. a family of 4 would have a $480 personal annual federal income tax burden..

     

    No money to pay it,, you can go to the local govt civil work station and get a menial job at minimum wage = taxable with fica withheld as well- to work off your family's federal income tax minimum burden.

     

    Result is $18 Billion per year inincremental federal income tax revenues. And best of all 100% of individuals who live in this Constitutional Republic bear some of the cost of their government.
    8 Oct 2011, 11:01 AM Reply Like
  • OVERBID2002
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    1980XLS, Two trillion of Bush's debt is due to the 3% cut in the top tax rate. That cut was made up for by borrowing. I don't know why you think it is ok to transfer that money to the richest among us and that our kids and grandkids have to pay for it. As for who pays, a cut in rates is nonsense becaue they don't pay anywhere close to what the corporate would indicate. Take a look at the chart here:
    http://bit.ly/nW86MX
    22 Oct 2011, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Overbid,

     

    Agree tax cuts were likely excessive.

     

    That said, you can spin it any way you want.

     

    Payroll taxes one pays for a future benefit for oneself, is not paying taxes.

     

    Especially since even that amount paid, will likely be insufficient to cover the benefits one will likely recieve in the future, given future healthcare costs along with rising life expectancies

     

    So when I put money in my 401K or IRA, I can claim that as "Paying Taxes" too?

     

    Get Real.

     

    I won't even bother mentioning other redistribution methods in place, like Food stamps, housing subsidies & Earned Income Credit.

     

    Deduct Payroll taxes from your calculations, and the fact remains.
    Too many pay nothing and most don't pay enough.
    22 Oct 2011, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Overbid....not sure I understand what you are saying.

     

    Nearly 3/4 of a Trillion of Bush's debt is due to Iraq war.
    During Bush's presidency, spending increased at 6% per year and revenue increased at 3% a year. Revenue increases were more than adequate to cover the cost of inflation as measured by CPI. So...and even your chart suggests that the contriubtion of income taxes has maintained a flat 47% to 50% of tax receipts. So if the 47% number for those paying no federal income taxes has been growing and the total take from income taxes has been flat....then who's been making up for the loss in revenue from the 47% segment?
    23 Oct 2011, 06:32 AM Reply Like
  • OVERBID2002
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    So money out of pocket isn't a tax if you believe you receive a benefit for it? Is that what you are saying? So if you pay your income taxes you receive no benefit for it?

     

    I think that's the heart of the matter. There are a lot of people who seem to believe that anything not for their direct benefit is welfare for someone else. Build a bridge? Welfare for construction workers. Public education? Welfare for teachers, cushy job for top-heavy school administrators. FDA inspectors? EPA regulators? OSHA inspectors? What does that have to do with me?

     

    Right?

     

    23 Oct 2011, 08:49 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Overbid,

     

    There big difference from public spending that benefits every citizen collectively such as bridges, highways, nationtional defense etc, vs direct entitlements in which people get a check in the mail from the government.

     

    The latter only benefits the recipient, at the expense of everybody else.

     

    You can't grasp that?
    23 Oct 2011, 10:03 AM Reply Like
  • petyaczar
    , contributor
    Comments (282) | Send Message
     
    So often wrong yet never in doubt! You are a true American IDAL.

     

    BTW FICA is not a tax it is a deferred annuity. AND a mugger who steals my wallet, but does not take my watch, does not make me a gift of my watch. (Taxes)

     

    My money belongs to me, not to the govt. The govt is merely administrative overhead. It should be Constitutional and as small as possible. Currently it is neither.

     

    Also the USA is Constitutional Republic, not a Dimocracy. I dont think you know the difference, suggest you look it up before you opine further.

     

    "He Governs best,who governs least" Thomas Jefferson.

     

    To say otherwise would be merely a liberal perversion of the truth. ROFLMAO!!

     

    Go Tea PArty.
    24 Oct 2011, 10:46 AM Reply Like
  • Cjhies
    , contributor
    Comments (141) | Send Message
     
    wolverine27 - I agree completely about the cash. But "Uncertainty" is simply PC talk for tired of Obama's crippling regulations, Private sector bashing, and explosive debt growth. Reverse those problems and job growth will explode, firms will invest and we will have the economy we experienced in the 80s & 90s.
    13 Apr 2012, 05:54 PM Reply Like
  • SafisKusai
    , contributor
    Comments (236) | Send Message
     
    Why is everyone up in arms that Senate democrats have introduced a bill, which the president has given a nod of approval to, that will put a 5% tax on millionaires that will fund the new jobs bill? Honestly THIS is what Ronald Reagan wanted except with an extra clause. This is trickle down economics except with a mandate to make sure the money actually trickles down, how do people not understand this?
    6 Oct 2011, 06:56 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    Safiskusai....do you really think it will create new jobs? What kind? For how long? How will they be funded after the first year?

     

    More smoke and mirrors.
    6 Oct 2011, 06:58 PM Reply Like
  • SafisKusai
    , contributor
    Comments (236) | Send Message
     
    honestly i doubt it. I just think its funny how the tea party complains about it, yet its barely different from reagan's trickle down economics. Jack Welch is right that the private sector are the job creators, however people criticize obama for jobs... he cant mandate corps to hire. The environment we are in right now just isnt a positive one for job creation, when ever we get a leg up in the US, europe's crisises just pull us back down and shake our financial sector which is still reeling from 08/09.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:14 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    SafisKusai,

     

    Perhaps you are not familiar with Davis-Bacon, and other such vote buying schemes.

     

    $16 Doughnuts? That aint nothin'

     

    In my county, an electrician, on a federally funded project is required (by law) to get paid $85 per hour.

     

    By the time one adds FICA, WC ins, UE ins, etc. You will be paying well north of $100 per hour.

     

    BTW, if the employer fails to comply, he gets charged with a felony.

     

    Shovel ready, remember?

     

    http://1.usa.gov/omL5DJ

     

    How's that for Hope & Change?

     

    You actually didn't think they would spend your money wisely, like with Solyndra or something?
    6 Oct 2011, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • J 457
    , contributor
    Comments (951) | Send Message
     
    Doesn't that $100 go right back into the economy when the electrician gets paid?
    6 Oct 2011, 07:30 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    J457,

     

    No, Union dues and political contributions.

     

    Why not just make it $200 then.

     

    That would be even better (sarcasm)

     

    We'll have taxpayers making $25 per hr paying them $200.

     

    Sounds fair to me clueless.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:43 PM Reply Like
  • user344210
    , contributor
    Comments (219) | Send Message
     
    "Why is everyone up in arms that Senate democrats have introduced a bill, which the president has given a nod of approval to, that will put a 5% tax on millionaires that will fund the new jobs bill?"

     

    Probably because none of us are so naive as to think that the tax revenue that comes in from such a tax will actually only be used for that purpose. As soon as dollar one comes into the Treasury, there will be 25 different Congress members clamoring about how it needs to fund whatever pet project they've got their panties in a twist about that week.

     

    These *ssholes have spent every tax dollar plus trillions and trillions beyond every tax dollar and you still want to send them more? How f*cking stupid are you, exactly?
    6 Oct 2011, 09:39 PM Reply Like
  • OVERBID2002
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    Safi, you and XLS just completely swallow the BS from Faux News and the other Tea Party talking heads that businesses are the job creators. They're not. The job creators are the people who buy goods and services in this country. All that businesses do is respond to demand. Let's face it, the biggest welfare recipients today are the US Congress; they get paid and do absolutely nothing. Instead, they take money out of the economy and do there best to undermine public confidence.
    18 Oct 2011, 08:32 AM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    OVERBID2002 you nailed that one.
    21 Oct 2011, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    XLS didn't even mention the mult-million dollar bonuses to executives some of which failed miserably at there jobs. At least if a 100 dollar electrician fails you just blow a fuse, or the electrician gets electrocuted or something.
    21 Oct 2011, 10:36 PM Reply Like
  • Anwar Bhamla
    , contributor
    Comments (96) | Send Message
     
    Did anyone expect that J. Welch or any other millionaire would applaud the proposal?

     

    All Fox, the Repugnants, the millionaires want is lower taxes, higher defense spending and foreign wars so that the desperate unemployed can go get themselves killed. Meanwhile the chinese, the Viets and all the poor countries can work for substandard wages providing them with extraordinarily low priced goods and services.

     

    Where is the capitalist Henry Ford? he wanted to pay his employees good wages (and incidentally above market) so that they could afford to purchase the cars they helped produce. If he were alive today, he would be labelled a communist/socialist by Fox and the Republicans!
    6 Oct 2011, 06:57 PM Reply Like
  • warrenrial
    , contributor
    Comments (559) | Send Message
     
    You guys posting should run for congress they can't agree on anything either.
    6 Oct 2011, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • Ted Bear
    , contributor
    Comments (607) | Send Message
     
    This the same Jack Welch that drove GE into the ground?

     

    These guys that leveraged every thing that was barely tangible to the moon for personal gain now want to have a say in how we dig oursleves out of that hole? My ass. He can go suffer with the likes of Greenburg (AIG) or Weill (CitiBank) about how their legacy is that they single handedly destroyed some of America's greatest companies.

     

    What a joke, these guys thinking they could tell anyone anything about how to create jobs, run companies, or build an economy.

     

    They knew one thing: How to get as much for themselevs as they possibly could. That they left their companies and the US economy in shanbles never mattered to them in the least during their reigns of personal greed.

     

    And why is it we should listen now???
    6 Oct 2011, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • untrusting investor
    , contributor
    Comments (9966) | Send Message
     
    Ted,
    Exactly right. And it is this crony capitalism with all large public corporations and personal greed of public company executives that is the root cause of much of america's decline today. When you combine crony capitalism with a political system (both parties) that functions primarily to payback the crony capitalist and special interest groups, then you get what we have in the US today.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • RW2
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for speaking out Jack, you're right on.
    6 Oct 2011, 08:04 PM Reply Like
  • tjohn1
    , contributor
    Comments (152) | Send Message
     
    Jack: Where are those jobs from private sector? Don't those jobs show up in government payroll numbers released every month by the Labor Department?. For God's sake, where are those jobs, Jack?
    What about your own GE? How many jobs did GE add? Speak up Jack!
    6 Oct 2011, 08:05 PM Reply Like
  • user344210
    , contributor
    Comments (219) | Send Message
     
    I'm not even a huge Jack Welch fan, but to see a bunch of losers who probably wouldn't even make it to Assistant to the Regional Manager at GE say that Welch is clueless is pretty damn funny.

     

    If you people are so smart, why don't you just start a company and bilk all the current rich folks out of their money? Then, you'd have all the money you want for your asinine social spending schemes, like paying elementary school teachers the millions of dollars per year you claim they are worth. Oh, I know, you're just such humanitarians that it pains you to think of exploiting others. Right, each and every one of you would do exactly the same things as the "fat cats" you bitch and moan about, if you found yourself in the same situation. Here's a tip: if your argument against someone's actions depends on the idea that they are more "greedy" than they should be, your argument is chock full of fail. Every person on this planet is equally greedy, we just differ in our ability to monetize that greed. "Greed" is a code word used by the left to extract the money they can't earn in the marketplace. Why can't they earn it in the marketplace? Because they offer nothing of value.
    6 Oct 2011, 09:47 PM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Jack is right about the Obama points. The White House actually believes they can create jobs but the best they can do is to create an environment to drive jobs. Pushing for higher taxes and regulation is not creating an environment for more jobs. Layer on unknown health care regulation and the party is over.

     

    We have been offshoring jobs for many decades. Textiles comes to mind. Ironically the internet has created a highway for more jobs to migrate offshore so I guess it is Al Gore's fault. Anyways service jobs have went offshore on the backbone of the internet as it broke down geographic barriers.
    7 Oct 2011, 12:46 AM Reply Like
  • Pablo87
    , contributor
    Comments (121) | Send Message
     
    The spending in Washington is definitely out of control, just need to look at Treasury Dept. monthly reports back to 1998 to see it. Its been increasing in real terms for 50+ years but there's been an acceleration since 2000. There's no correlation with reducing poverty or income inequality that I can tell and actually, social security which you would expect to have increased a lot, hasn't because its not indexed to inflation!

     

    It would be more effective for the govt to cut the expenses in all these depts way back and use a national payroll service and the military to hire 20M Americans at $20,000 a year ($400B annual cost) to do odd jobs. Unemployment solved.

     

    This kind of solution never gets implemented because people don't believe its so simple. It would be like saying increase government spending 5% over inflation and run trade deficits continuously for 40+years and you can take the wealthiest nation in the world and turn it into the most indebted one in less than 40 years...nobody would believe it
    7 Oct 2011, 03:26 AM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    I would add on that everyone that receives welfare also must report for work and earn it. Sweep the streets for all I care but you have to do something.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • stever10
    , contributor
    Comments (104) | Send Message
     
    You might have more credibility if you didn't have to take government handouts and overcharge them for everything that you do for them!
    7 Oct 2011, 08:25 AM Reply Like
  • lrae75
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    When a large nation has an ocean on two sides of it and yet most of the seafood in its markets comes from 6000 miles away, you know you have a problem.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:35 AM Reply Like
  • John Cordes
    , contributor
    Comments (168) | Send Message
     
    GOP = Government of Plutocrats, let's see GE paid no taxes, GE bailed out by TARP, GE offshores record number of jobs, GE executives enjoy largest paydays in history, dam Obama proposes to take a marginal 3% to 5% after the first million dollars of income. Why that dirty....#@%$ so and so.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10454) | Send Message
     
    John....you are a suppsed contributor to SA. Can you tell everyone when and why GE paid not "Federal Income Taxes" (clearly a more precise term than the one you use). Do you know anything about corporate income taxes? Perhaps you could research the last 10 years of GE's corporate annual reports and report back on how much GE paid in Federal Income Taxes.

     

    Let's put it this way....from what I have seen of your comments today you don't deserve to be a SA contributor. And if you continue with your politically motivated liberal nonsense....rest assured I will be all over your posts demonstrating that most liberals don't think very clearly at all.
    7 Oct 2011, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • losbronces
    , contributor
    Comments (704) | Send Message
     
    And yet Jeff Immelt is on Obama's team as the head of Obama's Jobs Council. Tell me GE hasn't benefited from the Obama administration.

     

    Crony capitalism wasting tax dollars. And yes the Republicans are just as bad.
    7 Oct 2011, 10:46 AM Reply Like
  • lenf333
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    Jack is getting close to the time when he's going to answer for all the little people he's screwed (fire the bottom 10%). Good luck Jack NOT.
    7 Oct 2011, 10:10 AM Reply Like
  • jhill35e
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    It's about time the CEOs started speaking up. Keep it going.
    7 Oct 2011, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • petyaczar
    , contributor
    Comments (282) | Send Message
     
    Welch is right on. Obama is an incompetent commie/socialist who never held a real job or served his country in any capacity.

     

    We need to Dump the Chump.

     

    Bamacare is nothing more than a transfer of wealth (benefits) to minorities and illegal aliens in the form of free healthcare funded predominantly by whites who already have healthcare benefits that they themselves pay for.

     

    Bama and this obamanation business must be brought to an end in 2012 before it destroys this ountry. Which is what Bama wants to do .
    7 Oct 2011, 11:35 AM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    i did not think this much stupidity existing in this world ......i stand corrected.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:14 PM Reply Like
  • whets
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Older people like Jack tend to over simplify since their time is of the essence and who wants to waste it on critical analysis. One of my favorite "transfer payments" was the sub prime mortgage securities debacle whose major players have probably shared a meal or two with Jack where they recount their glory days while dining on some fava beans and a nice chianti.
    7 Oct 2011, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • marsec
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Why is Jack Welch not heading the President's Economic Advisory Board??? At least the President should at the very least read his book.......
    7 Oct 2011, 01:58 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    jack welch is an out dated old white billionaire who leached his corporation for every penny.

     

    he is a morally bankrupt person . just ask his wife and kids.
    7 Oct 2011, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • IndioBravo
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
     
    "Former" is the best part of Welsh's title. GE is on the path of recover from him.
    9 Oct 2011, 03:15 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Mongie=Marxist in chief, of sa
    19 Oct 2011, 06:53 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector