Skip to main content

View Diary: The Republican Party Has No Idea How To Create Jobs (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Is this a real policy proposal or a political (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib, nextstep


    Because if Democrats really want to extend unemployment benefits, they could pick up Republican votes if they found a way to pay for the $25 billion.  Several Republicans have said so.  Unfortunately, that's no easy task -- and I haven't heard any proposal from Congressional Democrats to pay for the $25 billion.

    That's the only way that I can see any possibility of an extension happening.  No matter how much Democrats here and elsewhere complain, no matter how much Democrats call Republicans heartless.  I think the bottom line is that a paid for extension has a chance of passing, but one that's not paid for has no chance whatsoever of passing the House.

    Without a "pay for," the cancellation of unemployment insurance is nothing more than an issue for the 2014 elections, I think.  Unfortunately, political issues for the 2014 election don't help the people who are losing benefits now.  

    •  Pay for extending unemployment benefits (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jayden, Calamity Jean

      by eliminating unnecessary tax expenditures for fossil fuel interests and get rid of the carried interest loophole. Then use it as a club against the reactionaries in the Republican House if they won't go for that. Then again a pullout from Afghanistan will pay for the unemployed in less than 10 weeks and the justification for extending that conflict is now gone with huge majorities of the public favoring an end to that war.

      •  Or maybe cancel those multi-billion (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Calamity Jean, Creosote, NoMoreLies

        dollar destroyers/ships that are scheduled?

      •  I haven't ever seen an estimate in print (0+ / 0-)

        but I would be shocked if changing the taxation of carried interest would raise more than $1 billion a year. To qualify for carried interest you have to be a manager of an investment partnership like a hedge fund, private equity fund or venture capital fund. I would estimate that fewer than 1,000 people in the US earn more than $100,000 annually from carried interest. Add to that the fact the IRS would only be receiving the difference between 20% and 40% and I don't think that's a big pot of gold.

        Just as an aside it's not a loophole. It's a result of a Tax Court case in the early 1970s and every partnership since has been structured to allow for carried interest. Congress could have changed it any time in the last 40 years and hasn't.

        So changing the taxation of carried interest would fund a week or two of extended unemployment compensation.

        To have unemployment compensation extended quickly the Dems will have to propose some other savings acceptable to the GOP. If they don't the Republicans will wait and see if there is any real political damage. If there is they will pass it, if there isn't they won't.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 06:51:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Paying for Unemployment (6+ / 0-)

      Every week monies are taken out of your paycheck for unemployment insurance or don't you know this?  Pay for it, we already have.  Just like Social Security and Medicare, it is paid for during a lifetime of working and you're entitiled to get that money back when you retire.  I and you are ENTITLED to these benefits and if I remember correctly 2 wars were started, Medicare Part D and nobody (Dems included) bothered to ask how we were going to pay for it.  Instead they reduced the tax paid by the rich and now want to throw it on the backs of the working class and the poor by taking away benefits.  

      If you really want to pay for it, take it from those defense contracts for equipment not even the armed services wants.  Or, better yet, Congress can take a reduction in their salaries which, by the way, they don't even deserve because of how little they work, and pay for it that way.

      Never be afraid to voice your opinion and fight for it . Corporations aren't people, they're Republicans (Rev Al Sharpton 10/7/2011) Voting is a louder voice than a bullhorn but sometimes you need that bullhorn to retain your vote.

      by Rosalie907 on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 06:21:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  How long do you think (0+ / 0-)

        the minimum wage would be where it is if that's what Congress was paid?

        I know many minimum-wage earners (or just above minimum) who work harder, and smarter, than any Teahadist in the House.

        English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

        by Youffraita on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 11:50:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Complete and utter bullshit (3+ / 0-)
      Because if Democrats really want to extend unemployment benefits, they could pick up Republican votes if they found a way to pay for the $25 billion.
      Nice GOP talking points there but it's complete and utter bullshit.  Democrats have been proposing numerous ways to pay for the extensions and just about any increase in spending.  It's just that the GOP and their shills like yourself refuse to accept those proposals.  

      How about eliminating tax subsidies to oil companies?

      How about a financial transaction tax?

      How about as someone else mentioned eliminating the carried interest loophole?

      How about eliminating farm subsidies to large corporations?

      How about cutting defense spending?

      How about negotiating prescription drugs or allowing reimportation?

      Oh that's right all those things affect the rich and large corporations.  Wouldn't want that, so fuck over the poor unemployed instead.  After all they're just lazy motherfuckers who obviously are living large off the gov't teat and need to get up off their fat asses and get a job.  Isn't that right?

      When the GOP agrees to a single fucking tax increase on the rich THEN and ONLY then can you try to pin the blame on the Dems.  Pretending that your beloved GOP will agree to extension of unemployment benefits if they're 'paid for' is utter bullshit otherwise and we all know it.  Their idea of 'paid for' is cuts to some other vital service, like the ACA or Medicare.  

      This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

      by DisNoir36 on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 07:24:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not "blaming" Democrats (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        happyshadow, VClib

        I'm simply saying this is a Democratic proposal, and that Senate Democrats have a choice: (1) bring a bill to the floor for a vote that has in it a "pay for" (one of your suggestions or something else) and have a chance of getting it voted out of the Senate  with some Republican support thereby giving it a chance o getting it through the House -- and risk the possibility that even that does not pass; or (2) bring a bill to the floor of the Senate that has no "pay for," have no chance whatsoever of having it become law (it may no get 60 votes and if it does it does not ever even come up for a vote in the House),  but force Senate Republicans to vote on it and use that vote against them in November (but that gets no relief to the people who need the benefits now).  

        Senator Reid is apparently going with option 2.  

      •  Letting the Bush tax cuts expire would have (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        required them to do nothing.

    •  RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH (0+ / 0-)

      That'll pay for it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (60)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (31)
  • Environment (30)
  • Republicans (27)
  • Elections (23)
  • 2016 (23)
  • Spam (22)
  • GOP (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Bernie Sanders (19)
  • Science (19)
  • Education (19)
  • Media (18)
  • Climate Change (18)
  • Labor (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Law (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site