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

Let me offer my rebuttals. Some concepts of the bill may be bipartisan, but the bill is not. Also, we live in a different era then we did in the "Work Together" era in politics. We have a $14.6 trillion national debt. It's extremely important to be very careful when spending any kind of money because that money will be debt for our children to pay off. We don't cut revenue with all types of tax cuts. We would with payroll tax cuts because 47% of Americans pay 0 income taxes, so the extra income earned would result in a revenue cut. Eliminating the corporate tax would increase revenue because it boosts foreign interest in the United States to start up companies. Payroll tax cuts are simply short term gimmicks: demand-side tax cuts simply won't do enough to help the economy to justify the mammoth cost of hundreds of billions of dollars. The infrastructure bank would fix very little because, while a few projects may have a return on their investment, most will fall flat. There is also a massive amount of possibility for corruption with an Infrastructure Bank, particularly with a crony capitalist/socialist like Barack Hussein Obama at the helm. See the massive Solyndra loan scandal. Money could also be wasted on things like crosswalks for turtles, just like what happened in the 1st economic porkulus package. There is also so much litigation required to start up a road project that we would still have declining roads, even with the interest bank. We could spend nearly all of the money and see nearly no roads built. Infrastructure spending only nets the return when the roads get built. Getting through a federal bureaucracy makes that more difficult. Even the Infrastructure Bank will probably still have walls of regulations and hurdles. I said that GOOD tax cuts are a solid venue to economic growth. Cutting the payroll tax isn't a particularly efficient way to cut taxes to spur growth. It's much better to have PERMANENT tax cuts on corporations. We have the highest corporate tax in the world, and it's a necessity to bring that down so we can become more globally competitive. The payroll tax is demand-sided and is not very efficient. There are much better ways to spur economic growth: repeal Obama's disastrous, job-killing legislation and regulations, lower taxes permanently on corporate and individual income tax, and create an environment hospitable to business in all ways. School spending has recently been cut, yet test scores haven't declined rapidly, as fear-mongering liberals have claimed. We spend $200,000 per public school classroom. This is enough-private schools do much better with far less money. It's not a money problem, it's a union problem. Catholic schools often get a fraction of the money public schools get, yet they aren't breaking down. This is because the money is better spent in the private sector. States and localities are better suited for infrastructure projects. The sheer enormity of the problem and the giant bureaucratic mess we have in DC are the reasons why we need to split up the projects: divide and conquer. I am not saying that a particular company would have an interest. However, companies could band together because good infrastructure is good for all the business. While the cost of repairing all the roads is expensive, the problem is certainly not extremely drastic. Studies indicate that unemployment benefits increase the jobless rate by about 1.5%. They don't make all people lazy. Your father is conscientious and cared about the value of work. However, many people will succumb to take a government handout because it is the easy way out. We would be better served if these people were working. Also, some people make more money off of unemployment benefits than a new, minimum-wage job they could take. This increases the jobless rate. Too many public officials in general means too much government spending. Too much government spending does crowd out private investment? Don't believe me? Look at a graph of government spending growth as a percent of GDP and private sector growth as a percent of GDP. You see an inverse relationship. States and locality receive the money, with a host of bureaucratic control and red tape. When the money dries up, the construction companies won't have the incentive to hire the workers because they no longer receive money from the government. Of course. you could pass another stimulus bill containing more construction spending, but this would add to the deficit. If the companies would still hire them after the money dries up, then we wouldn't need government money for those jobs in the first place. Yes, sometimes businesses do go bankrupt. In this case, employers can see that they actually were valuable to the company using various metrics. Businesses have a free-market incentive to hire the best employees. "Excessive millions"-this phrase sounds extremely socialist. The rich EARNED their money. Many started out poor and worked their way up. They give a lot of their money to charity and still work very hard. I don't think we should have class warfare. Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. But he pays a lot more in taxes. The bill includes tax cuts, but also raises taxes on the rich, those who create jobs. We shouldn't be taxing the job-creators and redistributing it to everyone else. That is socialism and does not belong in this great nation. Eliminating the corporate tax-$191 billion, about 1/3 the cost of Obama's plan. Countries with more economic freedom have better quality of life, more income, less corruption, and better environments. The Democrats single-handedly destroyed the economy by encouraging the subprime mortgage fiasco: "Everyone has a right to own a home." -I am just saying that estimates for the 1st stimulus were faulty. It said that unemployment would stay below 9%. It didn't. Can we trust these new estimates about Obama's new stimulus from the same folks? I think not. We need real change, not more taxes and spending. I urge a Negative Ballot.