busted link

Your link doesn't work.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/the_us...ntries.php

Probably would be better off looking for a little less biased site though.

(04-10-2013 11:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Your link doesn't work.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/the_us...ntries.php

Probably would be better off looking for a little less biased site though.

http://www.ctj.org/

Why?

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)DoubleHuskie84 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Your link doesn't work.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/the_us...ntries.php

Probably would be better off looking for a little less biased site though.

http://www.ctj.org/

Why?

Because that is a left leaning think tank. I personally don't have a problem with it but the Klake types won't give it a second thought(or a first for that matter) just like I don't believe anything from Heritage Foundation or Enterprise Institute. I am just trying to be fair and balanced. :)

http://nationalpriorities.org/en/analysi...sals-2014/

A comparison of some of the budget proposals.

(04-11-2013 09:04 AM)BobL Wrote:  http://nationalpriorities.org/en/analysi...sals-2014/

A comparison of some of the budget proposals.

Just a couple of comments...

I found the "job creation" line kind of puzzling. The site says that xx% of Americans want the focus to be on job creation. Then it only comments on job creation through increased funding in the budget. Maybe some people (Ryan?) believe that government spending is a hindrance to long term job creation.

Look at some of the other lines. I think it is interesting that some of those things can clearly be argued to be better left in the hands of states (education, food stamps), and maybe even making Medicaid a more strongly administered/funded state program. Even if you don't agree, this table seems to highlight how much government each proposal thinks should be federal and how much should be left to the states (locals).

I read the "about" tab regarding the organization and it seems to be left leaning. I could be wrong, and I'm not trying to discredit it. If they are, they'd likely be for more government involvement in most things.

I do agree that it is an interesting comparison, and worthy of a deep look.

The article exemplifies the third type of lie, according to Mark Twain: Statistics.

Look at Job Creation.

Obama:
$166 billion over 10 years for job creation initiatives, including infrastructure repairs and tax credits for small businesses that hire or raise wages.

Ryan:
No new funding for job creation.

The implication here is that jobs will only be created if the Government comands it, without mentioning where the Obama plan will get their $166 billion.

Perhaps it should read that Obama wants to take so much money out of the market, that after it gets skimmed down from government waste, he might still have $166 billion to throw down to the peasants in another wasteful government program. And taxpayers should be thankful if he even gives them that much.

Paul Ryan opts to let the actual job-creators create the jobs.

Obama has already had five years to create infrastructure jobs, and how has that worked out?

Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected. - Obama

Then there is tax revenue:

Obama:
$583 billion in new tax revenue over 10 years.

Ryan:
No change in tax revenue.

The assumption here is that increasing taxes will increase revenue, but that is not always the case. After a point, raising taxes leads to diminishing returns as it inflicts so much damage on the economy that there are less producers from whom the Government can extract revenue. I lose no sleep at night over the Government not getting all the revenue they want. The government is not supposed to be maximizing their revenue anyway. They should only take what is necessary to fulfill their limited functions, and they have far exceeded that.

Funny, how there is no public opinion poll of what percentage of Americans think the Government deserves more revenue.

(04-11-2013 09:22 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(04-11-2013 09:04 AM)BobL Wrote:  http://nationalpriorities.org/en/analysi...sals-2014/

A comparison of some of the budget proposals.

Just a couple of comments...

I found the "job creation" line kind of puzzling. The site says that xx% of Americans want the focus to be on job creation. Then it only comments on job creation through increased funding in the budget. Maybe some people (Ryan?) believe that government spending is a hindrance to long term job creation.

Look at some of the other lines. I think it is interesting that some of those things can clearly be argued to be better left in the hands of states (education, food stamps), and maybe even making Medicaid a more strongly administered/funded state program. Even if you don't agree, this table seems to highlight how much government each proposal thinks should be federal and how much should be left to the states (locals).

I read the "about" tab regarding the organization and it seems to be left leaning. I could be wrong, and I'm not trying to discredit it. If they are, they'd likely be for more government involvement in most things.

I do agree that it is an interesting comparison, and worthy of a deep look.

I dont know the breakdown but infrastructure spending is in the job creation category...that is government's responsibility. As for the tax breaks etc...thats where we will disagree. Generally speaking I agree with providing tax incentives to influence behavior(be it personal or business that is beneficial, yes i know who decides what is beneficial, well some things are crystal clear.)..whether that be local, state or federal.

(04-11-2013 12:20 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)DoubleHuskie84 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 11:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Your link doesn't work.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2013/04/the_us...ntries.php

Probably would be better off looking for a little less biased site though.

http://www.ctj.org/

Why?

Because that is a left leaning think tank. I personally don't have a problem with it but the Klake types won't give it a second thought(or a first for that matter) just like I don't believe anything from Heritage Foundation or Enterprise Institute. I am just trying to be fair and balanced. :)

I'm so proud of you Robert. *wipes tear*