Home › Forums › Political Corner › jobs
This topic contains 16 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by 
Beer 3 years ago.
- AuthorPosts
I’m curious to hear what other’s think regarding how more jobs be created, here in the United States and possibly abroad.
I understand that Trump intends to bring back some manufacturing jobs, but that has a limit since many of the manufacturing jobs will go to robots, not people.
Does the government need to fund more construction work, like the wall?
Will a trickle down approach work? I personally don’t think so, at least not alone. Companies will invest, but it could mean operating with less debt, investing in technology, or outsourcing in other countries.
Do we need to lower the regulations and taxes on employment, in order to better compete with robots?
Do we modify or create regulations and taxes to incentivize employment over investment. Perhaps taxing capital gains the same rate as regular income?
Do we need to improve education, so that people can hold down skilled jobs? Perhaps we stop subsidizing education that doesn’t lead to employment?
Do we continue with income redistribution, so that unskilled labor doesn’t need to work?
Is it some sort of combination of the above?
Ok. Then do it.
Here is a few thoughts, in no particular order:
1. I remember in high school there was a shop class, an auto mechanic’s class, even a class where they built a house. To the extent those types of classes are gone, bring them back.
2. Lower the corporate tax rate. You have to be competitive with other countries to have jobs.
3. More of a partnership between your business community and the local community college. For example, let’s say Boeing has a large facility near your community. The college should have a two year degree program where you can basically get the training needed to be a worker there, all the way from the starting job and into management, HR, etc. So when you walk out of that degree program, you are ready for a career there. Manufacturing is getting more and more into robotics, then teach classes on how to use them. Four year degrees should be STEM degrees.
4. Interest rates need to be higher at some point. Right now, with rates this low, any half-ass plan will return more than 1% and make some money. If it cost companies 5-6% to raise capital, then they will only do the one or two best ideas and not those plus five more half-ass deals.
5. Stop subsidizing degrees that don’t lead to a job. 100% agree. You don’t NEED a degree in women’s studies, you can study women all you want outside of college. You have a local library and Google. When you get a degree in it, all you’ve proved to me is that you are stupid enough to pay $200,000 for something that you could have got for free.
Order the good wine
Here in the USA, there is a nationwide shortage of:
* Long distance truck drivers.
* Mechanics who can work on long distance trucks.
* Mechanics who can work on passenger cars.
* * The above goes double for those who can work on vehicle electronic systems.
* Electricians (skilled of course).
* Plumbers (skilled of course).
* Other trades that to not require back-breaking student loans, but to require getting one’s hands dirty and the occasional aching muscles.
Da Grilz won’t be competing with any man for da above. Nope, they will be in a slut march and expecting their office-bound male coworkers to cover for them . . . or else!Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?
More jobs can be created when all the men refuse to take all the jobs that women dont take. Because that is the time when real problems start. And you will be paid much more to solve problems than to work in construction for offices that c~~~s and manginas will use, for roads that women drive their expensive cars for which they did not work and so on.
Robots – yes, replace all women’s work with robots, automate the government. You need to create scarcity of women jobs so they get paid less and less, because at the moment they get paid way too higher than men.
The government should not fund anything because those money are the tax taken abusively from working
peoplemen.yes, improve education, use robots to repeat the same lesson over and over again, because there are too many c~~~s working in Education, Hospital, Government and big Corporations.
Make the immigration more easy so working females may come and compete with those females already there, you need to make women fight, like cat fights.
Matriarchy taxes us. Patriarchy taxes us. No Fucks Given! If they give us pains, lets give them pains. Daily.
Having fair trade instead of free trade zones would help.
Trump is pro oil pipeline and local manufacturing so this will create more jobs domestically.I agree with the lower corporate tax but a relatively low interest rate also encourages borrowing and building.
I think if anything the capital gains tax should be lowered to encourage more investment and bring back financial literacy to school curriculums.
Lifes a bitch,but you don't have to marry one!
@taxguy, you are right! Heed TaxGuy, he talks sense!
Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?
Here in the USA, there is a nationwide shortage of:
* Long distance truck drivers.
* Mechanics who can work on long distance trucks.
* Mechanics who can work on passenger cars.
* * The above goes double for those who can work on vehicle electronic systems.
* Electricians (skilled of course).
* Plumbers (skilled of course).
* Other trades that to not require back-breaking student loans, but to require getting one’s hands dirty and the occasional aching muscles.
Da Grilz won’t be competing with any man for da above. Nope, they will be in a slut march and expecting their office-bound male coworkers to cover for them . . . or else!When President Reagan took office in 1981 things begin to get better. At the time I was a high school dropout with an alcohol problem and a bitching wife. Needless to say that I’m still alive some 35 years later not because of Reagan but because of opportunities I would have not have if Barack Obama had been regulating the way the country should work. People don’t understand the true meaning of fascism. The true meaning is what you would see under Mussolini where he completely dictated the control of Industry Innovation etcetera. This is the face of fascism a boot stamping on a human face for a thousand years. So perhaps we have a chance hahaha
I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d
2. Lower the corporate tax rate. You have to be competitive with other countries to have jobs.
Agree to an extent, but that alone won’t encourage companies to hire more, when they can buy robots for the same job. I’d like to say payroll tax removed or lowered. Really, why is the government taxing companies for having a big payroll if companies having big payrolls is a good thing? Perhaps it made sense when companies NEEDED employees, in the way that people will buy gas despite a high taxes…but that time has passed.
4. Interest rates need to be higher at some point. Right now, with rates this low, any half-ass plan will return more than 1% and make some money. If it cost companies 5-6% to raise capital, then they will only do the one or two best ideas and not those plus five more half-ass deals.
I am good with this as long as it isn’t done in a way for banks to bring in more revenue while providing the same service. And of course, a higher rate is going to negatively effect markets where consumers typically get loans.
* Electricians (skilled of course).
* Plumbers (skilled of course).Where I’m at in Texas, skilled labor like this has to compete with ‘undocumented workers’, which has made it a lot more difficult to get good honest work. Just the other day, I had a plumber come out with a translator.
Robots – yes, replace all women’s work with robots, automate the government. You need to create scarcity of women jobs so they get paid less and less, because at the moment they get paid way too higher than men.
Why do you want to do this? I really don’t want women out of work, depending on men for their expenses more then they already are. I don’t see us going back to a time where primarily only men work. I’d rather push forward to a true equality, getting out of this middle ground nightmare.
Ok. Then do it.
Don’t be fat
I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d
I think if anything the capital gains tax should be lowered to encourage more investment and bring back financial literacy to school curriculums.
One of the vehicles the rich use to avoid taxes is to investment and pay capital gains tax instead of the higher income tax. It’s not necessarily that I want the rich to pay more taxes, but I don’t like that our tax code encourages people to play the market then it does to do actual constructive work.
Perhaps you keep or lower the rate if you’re overall wealth or income is low, but match capital gains and income rate for the wealthy.
I’ve been looking at income inequality a bit lately. There is no doubt that is growing and that is not a good thing for the economy. It’s a bubble that could burst. I’m not exactly fond of the government taking from the rich from and giving to the poor, but we need to have away to bridge the gap. To me you have reduce the ability of money to make more money for you, and increase the monetary value of actual work.
Ok. Then do it.
Anonymous42Ass f~~~ public sector unions.
F~~~ government workers on their pensions.
Stop political pardons.
Stop money printing.
Jail all the bankers.
Jail everyone on wall street.
Nuke Washington D.C., California, and Boston.
That may or may not put a dent in things.
P.S. make a law that states you only need 20 signatures to outright shoot someone dead.
TaxGuy wrote:
4. Interest rates need to be higher at some point. Right now, with rates this low, any half-ass plan will return more than 1% and make some money. If it cost companies 5-6% to raise capital, then they will only do the one or two best ideas and not those plus five more half-ass deals.
I am good with this as long as it isn’t done in a way for banks to bring in more revenue while providing the same service. And of course, a higher rate is going to negatively effect markets where consumers typically get loans.It would be painful in the short term, but the economy should encourage saving and investing not borrowing. Companies should make money and apply that back into their business, not just borrow other people’s money for almost free. It creates a massive misallocation of capital. Just look at the housing bubble. The government changed the laws to let more people have loans. Then when the bubble burst, they just lowered interest rates to zero and replaced a demand bubble with a interest rate bubble.
Interest rates are at a 500 year low. 500 YEAR LOW. 500 f~~~ing year low. We are in uncharted territory and the unwind is not going to be pretty. We are in the eye of a storm right now, between 2008 and the very near future when the s~~~ really hits.
Order the good wine
I think if anything the capital gains tax should be lowered to encourage more investment and bring back financial literacy to school curriculums.
One of the vehicles the rich use to avoid taxes is to investment and pay capital gains tax instead of the higher income tax. It’s not necessarily that I want the rich to pay more taxes, but I don’t like that our tax code encourages people to play the market then it does to do actual constructive work.
Perhaps you keep or lower the rate if you’re overall wealth or income is low, but match capital gains and income rate for the wealthy.
I’ve been looking at income inequality a bit lately. There is no doubt that is growing and that is not a good thing for the economy. It’s a bubble that could burst. I’m not exactly fond of the government taking from the rich from and giving to the poor, but we need to have away to bridge the gap. To me you have reduce the ability of money to make more money for you, and increase the monetary value of actual work.
The only real solid tax theory of why you tax capital gains at a lower rate is because you are taxing inflation on long-term capital gains. You could fix that with an inflation adjusted purchase price. For example, let’s say you have some 20 year old Apple stock sitting around that you paid $20 for. You would look up an index and it would say the accumulated inflation over the past 20 years is 50%. So, you add another 50% ($10) to your basis, calculate the gain and pay full tax. Theoretically, it’s just easier to give it a lower tax rate and leave it at that.
Also, I don’t know why there is such a huge fuss over increasing the income tax rate on people making over $1 million per year. It would help fix the income inequality a bit and raise some more money.
Order the good wine
Do we continue with income redistribution
No. This is a huge part of the problem. The government all too often subsidizes bad choices and stupid decisions we want less of…not more of. For example…debt. They give tax write offs for mortgage debt and student loans. Well how about we just lower tax rates a bit, get rid of those write offs, and maybe people can get through college with less debt, save up a bigger down payment for a house, or have more incentive to pay off their debts rather than fall into the slavery/monthly payment mind set for life and thinking the debt is alright because it gets them a nice tax return. Paying 8000 a year in interest to save 1500 in taxes isn’t winning, but a lot of people think it is, and the 1% is laughing at them.
The only real solid tax theory of why you tax capital gains at a lower rate is because you are taxing inflation on long-term capital gains. You could fix that with an inflation adjusted purchase price. For example, let’s say you have some 20 year old Apple stock sitting around that you paid $20 for. You would look up an index and it would say the accumulated inflation over the past 20 years is 50%. So, you add another 50% ($10) to your basis, calculate the gain and pay full tax. Theoretically, it’s just easier to give it a lower tax rate and leave it at that.
Also, I don’t know why there is such a huge fuss over increasing the income tax rate on people making over $1 million per year. It would help fix the income inequality a bit and raise some more money.
I disagree. Raising income tax rates on people earning wages over a million isn’t going to really change anything. Most the people with ridiculously high incomes are pulling a ton of money in capital gains in. Who makes over a million a year in payroll? Movie stars and professional athletes? They generally aren’t the ones blowing the wealth distribution curve out of the water because for most of them they have a few high earning years than fade off into irrelevance. I guess some CEO’s and a small handful of big wig corporate types might…but a lot of them are also taking stock options to skate around income tax rates. Its multi billionaire types that get the lowest effective tax rates that are blowing the wealth distribution curve up.
I’m not out to soak the rich…but at the same time I think its impossible to shift wealth back to the middle class without raising the taxes on the type of income the super rich are making while lowering taxes on the income the middle class is making. Raising capital gains rates a bit while lowering income taxes across the board would do that…simply raising the top income bracket wouldn’t.
narwhal wrote:
Do we continue with income redistributionNo. This is a huge part of the problem. The government all too often subsidizes bad choices and stupid decisions we want less of…not more of. For example…debt. They give tax write offs for mortgage debt and student loans. Well how about we just lower tax rates a bit, get rid of those write offs, and maybe people can get through college with less debt, save up a bigger down payment for a house, or have more incentive to pay off their debts rather than fall into the slavery/monthly payment mind set for life and thinking the debt is alright because it gets them a nice tax return. Paying 8000 a year in interest to save 1500 in taxes isn’t winning, but a lot of people think it is, and the 1% is laughing at them.
I’ve wondered why the government pushes home ownership so strongly. I mean, why do they care? I’ve convinced it’s because home owners are stronger consumers. Renters have less space for consumer goods and will spend more on services for their home.
As far as tax write-offs for debt, I agree that it’s deceptive. I am sure the banks love that. It also encourages people to keep buying and selling because there is no ‘advantage’ to owning a home outright…so why not keep moving?
Really, I’m convinced that the US is surviving so much better then we have in previous generations because we are spectacular consumers. Our greed for consumer goods can outlast any fear of debt.
As for the benefit of renting and owning, obviously you’re correct that the tax writeoff doesn’t negate the interest and property taxes. However, there is the benefit of principal and rising values you get from ownership that you don’t get from renting. You can also ‘lock in’ your costs better when owning over renting. Really though, I think it’s mostly a lifestyle choice. Owning is going to cost more, and you are likely going to spend more elsewhere as well, but for many people it’s a more enjoyable life then renting.
Ok. Then do it.
I’m not out to soak the rich…but at the same time I think its impossible to shift wealth back to the middle class without raising the taxes on the type of income the super rich are making while lowering taxes on the income the middle class is making. Raising capital gains rates a bit while lowering income taxes across the board would do that…simply raising the top income bracket wouldn’t.
Forgot to mention. I completely agree on this. Capital gains, although it has it’s benefit to society, really isn’t the most productive form of ‘work’, particularly when it’s generating so much wealth inequality. Honestly, there isn’t a ton of reason not to tax this more. I mean, if you have wealth, you are either going to spend, sit on it, or invest it. The only thing we don’t want to happen is to sit on it. Spending is a negative to the individual, sitting on it is negative as well with inflation. All investing has to do is break even after taxes and it’s still the only logical choice to make.
Of course, you have to compete with other countries and markets, but it’s hard to believe there isn’t room to move here.
Ok. Then do it.
Owning is going to cost more, and you are likely going to spend more elsewhere as well, but for many people it’s a more enjoyable life then renting.
No way…owning for the long haul is far cheaper than renting…but the key is, you have to actually own it. If you bought your first home in your 20s and carry a mortgage into your late 60s when you retire because you refinanced and pulled out equity four of five times over the years…you did it wrong. Back before the great depression 30 year mortgages didn’t even exist…people typically got 5-10 year mortgages. Fast forward 70 years of increasing government meddling and what do we have…30 year mortgages are now the norm and some banks are even offering 40 and 50 year mortgages. Again…another example of government wealth redistribution and government meddling f~~~ing people in the long run. Under the disguise of helping the middle class they really have done nothing for us other than cause housing bubbles and the mortgage meltdown, both of which we are at risk of repeating if they raise rates too quickly, and really who the hell knows what sort of s~~~ will be hitting the fans when rates do eventually come up as we’ve never had such low rates before.
Back in the day if you had an 8%+ mortgage paying it off early was a good investment. Today people are sitting on 3.5% loans and not paying them off early because why would you…you can fairly easily make more than that in the market going long…but most people also aren’t even putting the difference into investments, they’re just blowing it. These people are going to hate life if rates ever normalize. I don’t know how else to say it…but right now the banks are laughing all the way to the bank.
With all that aside you have to remember when you rent…your landlord owns the property and is paying all the expenses you would pay if you owned it PLUS he is making a profit off you.
I’ve wondered why the government pushes home ownership so strongly.
They don’t…they are pushing you to become a debt slave under the disguise of home ownership. If they wanted to push actual home ownership they could simply let people write off payments made toward the principal of their mortgage up to some amount each year on a primary residence instead of the interest portion. Why not incentivize paying it off early if you want people to own homes rather than subsidize the debt? Homes would certainly be easier for the middle class to actually own if they could essentially pay for them with pre-tax money.
Of course, you have to compete with other countries and markets, but it’s hard to believe there isn’t room to move here.
Yes and no…if you just look at the base rate for capital gains…then yeah, we are already pretty high…but at the same time a lot of other countries are shareholders or outright owners of businesses where as our government doesn’t own stock in companies. There is really no need for a country to charge a high capital gains tax if they are already entitled to a piece of the pie from companies paying dividends into government coffers.
If I could rewrite the system I think there would be no tax write offs, no credits, no deductions, and no loopholes. We’d all just pay no taxes for like our first 50,000 dollars and then it’d be a flat % over that amount somewhere in the ballpark of 20%. It would be a tax break for practically everyone but the super rich who make ridiculous amounts of money and have an army of accountants to get them out of taxes.
I thought it was ridiculous when the democrats were arguing people making over 250k a year should pay more than 39.6%. Like I said in earlier post…its not a doctor or a small business owner making 300k a year blowing the wealth distribution curve up…its the multi billionaires. Why go after some guy who really is upper middle class and not even disgustingly rich? The democrats trying to go after people earning wages of 250k+ a year was a joke. Let’s just say you are a doctor who starts your career at 30 and makes 300k a year, you pay 100k a year in taxes, live off 100k, and you invest 100k a year for 30 years and average 8% gains a year. You’d retire at 60 with 12 million. Yeah…that’s a lot of money…but in the grand scheme of things, that guys net worth at retirement would be 0.014% of Bill Gates current net worth, 0.016% of Warren Buffets, or 0.022% of Mark Zuckerbergs and without touching capital gains taxes…you don’t touch the Gates, Buffets, and Zuckerberg types. Again I’m not for soaking the rich by any means…but when your average middle class guy pays an effective tax rate of 25-30% while the multi billionaires pay 15-20% or less depending how bad they want to avoid taxes…that is a jacked up system.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
