GOP doesn't want the solution to be jobs. I know why. I don't understand why

[wiggs]

dem leaders and associated public discourse doesn't include more about jobs, one of the most obvious solutions to the deficit issue.

Pundits and officials will say that cutting spending and raising taxes are THE two approaches. And that some compromise involving those two elements will happen (although DU knows that cutting spending while increasing taxes on the wealthy is a poor compromise that hurts a lot more people than needed). But why isn't a major jobs package part of the formula?

More jobs = more tax revenue = smaller deficit

More jobs = less social spending = smaller deficit

More jobs = more revenue specifically to social security and medicare (if jobs are not in top 5%)

More jobs = less income inequality

Both gop and dems assume unemployment will be lower...but neither is pushing a jobs program that would get us there. Neither is saying that jobs could be an important part of this 'deal'.

Social security was fixed and fixed pretty well previously. But no one would have anticipated FLAT middle class income growth for 30 years and huge jumps in income in the upper brackets where increases don't translate to SS funding. That's why there's a small SS issue in 15 or 20 years. Small problem. Fixable by well paid middle income jobs for which wages increase with productivity.

[gkhouston]

1. Fewer jobs = desperate workers = lower wages. n/t

[bluesbassman]

4. Bingo. n/t

[whosinpower]

2. There are some who have decided that the middle class.....

Is now unnecessary. I am sorry to be blunt, but this is the way it has been going for 30 odd years.

Multinationals would rather grow a "new" middle class in China, or India than here. And as long as the financial heart of the world economy stays firmly on Wall Street....they do not care one ounce about the rest of America.

You have been deemed obsolete.

[FreakinDJ]

3. What the fuck arte you talking about

although DU knows that cutting spending while increasing taxes on the wealthy is a poor compromise that hurts a lot more people than needed

Like the Tax Loop Holes that encourage out sourcing American jobs ?

Or the Tax Loopholes that allow Millionaires to pay an Effective Tax Rate lower then teachers ?

Which 1 of these Tax Loopholes that RATpubliCONs insist would be a Tax Hike would hurt a lot more people then needed

[wiggs]

5. You misunderstand. Cutting programs for those who need it is a poor deal

even if the top 5% is taxed a bit as well. The top 5% won't miss the extra 20K they have to kick in. Won't matter...won't affect their lives. If that's their sacrifice, then it pales in comparison to the sacrifices made by many in the bottom 98%...those who won't get to college, who won't get mammograms, who won't get medications, who won't get help taking care of a disabled child...etc.

The point is, this idea of 'balance' is a crock. There should be revenue increases WITHOUT cutting needed programs to the bone.

[FreakinDJ]

6. Everyone is in Agreement over that

Closing just the Tax LoopHole that encourages outsourcing American Jobs to China and India would yield $600 Billion over 10 years - not counting the Tax Revenue from Middle Class jobs it would save

[SoutherDem]

7. Republicans don't want a better employment rate...

the higher the unemployment the better chance they have in 2012. Remember Bill Clinton "its the economy stupid" well Bill Clinton will be the most quoted Democratic president ever (at least by Republicans).

[saras]

8. And just where are these jobs going to come from?

It used to be that corporations were controllable enough that we could get them to produce somewhat suitable jobs. Without a worldwide anticorporate revolution, I just don't think we're ever going to be able to do that again.

And I don't know of any state in America progressive enough to be working seriously towards creating non-corporate family wage jobs.