The American Jobs Act (Obama Jobs Bill) Should be Passed

Let me respond to the rebuttals and provide a final statement. We DO live in a different era than the "Work Together" era. Bipartisanship itself is not bad, but it's important to understand that all this "bipartisanship" has brought us to a $14 trillion debt. Now, it is vital to get serious about cutting spending and reducing tax rates on job-creators. We can't increase revenue with payroll tax cuts because they are focused toward the poor. They won't have to pay taxes on their extra income because they don't pay income taxes. If we cut corporate taxes, that extra money will go to creating jobs, which means more people will pay income tax. "The infrastructure banks have done exceedingly well"-which is exactly why you said our infrastructure is failing, right? And roads haven't improved since the first stimulus. The National Bank can be used to fund bad things. $3.4 million was wasted on crosswalks for turtles before: http://abcnews.go.com.... Who says it won't happen again? This won't help our roads, but it will plunge us deeper in debt. It takes time to get roads built with the litigation process. Sometimes, a bureaucracy blocks construction after millions of dollars are set aside. I'm saying that there are better ways besides the payroll tax. And eliminating the corporate tax and cutting individual rates would cost less than Obama's stimulus. In my plan, we make up the lost revenues because all the money is injected right into the private economy to create jobs. These employees will pay payroll and possibly income taxes, making it cost less than expected. You told me to refrain from using words like "fear-mongering". But you never addressed any of my evidence. Private schools do have teacher's unions, but they don't have the same kind of power. A principal can simply fire a teacher at any time for any reason. There are also some big Catholic schools, and they also do well with less money. I was referring to dollars per student. The infrastructure bank does route to private companies, but it goes through a bureaucracy first that isn't good at determining which projects will actually help our economy and improve our infrastructure. Let's divide the work into states and localities, so our infrastructure will be better. Then, we unite and succeed. I said that corporations could band together. They can work together toward a common goal too, not just government. Here is my evidence about unemployment benefits increasing the jobless rate. It even comes from a left-wing news website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.... The Rahn curve explains that when government gets too big, the private economy grows less. http://www.heritage.org... But the money will dry up, and more appropriations will be needed so the construction employees will keep their jobs. So the $3 billion price tag means $300 billion in a century. The rich don't hoard their money-they invest in it to create jobs. And there are very few billionaires-your plan would also hurt people who earn $250,000 a year-which is not wealthy in many parts of the country. Some form of socialism may be OK as long as it is predominantly capitalist, but telling the rich to pay more when they already pay so much in taxes is a hard line into socialism. Yes, all countries have a little socialism, and frankly, they'd be better off if they had a lot less. The Democrats were the ones who promoted subprime mortgages. Payroll tax cuts are too inefficient and won't grow the economy quick enough for it to be worth it. All in all, the American Jobs Act is another partisan piece of legislation from the Community Organizer in Chief. Let's get working on real economic growth, not short-term gimmicks. I urge a negative ballot.