Tag Archives: Corporations

News

Obama’s deficit for the last two months exceeds Bush’s entire 2006 deficit

1 Comment

Story from Gateway Pundit. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The Obama Administration is already $292 billion in the red this year.
This is more than the national deficit for the entire year of 2006 ($248 billion).
Not good.

President George W. Bush never did this.

Obama tripled the national deficit his first year in office and he’s off to a record-setting start in fiscal year 2010.

During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth.

Please read my previous post that features two Harvard economics explaining why massive government spending drives unemployment up. You can’t fix an economy with spending. You fix it with tax cuts, especially for businesses who hire people. For example, we could cut the employer portion of payroll taxes completely. (That idea is from a different Harvard economist)

There are people I know who voted for Obama because McCain and Palin would spend more. I asked them to look at voting records and ratings from groups advocating fiscal conservatism, like Citizens Against Government Waste, the American Conservative Union, and the Club For Growth. But they kept talking about Sarah Palin’s wardrobe, because that’s all they saw on MSNBC.

News

Business leaders blame Obama for high unemployment rate

Leave a comment

Story from Reuters about a recent jobs summit. (H/T American Spectator via ECM)

Excerpt:

At a recent symposium, Intel boss Paul Otellini, a contributor to both parties, expressed concern about the “amount of variability in the system” created by the state of policy flux in healthcare, energy and tax policy. “It is very difficult to make a hiring decision,” he said. General Electric chief executive Jeffery Immelt, a strong supporter of Obama’s cap-and-trade proposal, added he would just like to “know what the rules are.”

All in all, a disturbing replay of the 1930s when FDR’s big changes left business reeling with uncertainty and confusion. The “devil you don’t know” and all that.

Small business is certainly with Big Business on this, particularly regarding the mercurial nature of healthcare reform. The substance of ObamaCare continues to morph daily — from the state of the public option to employer mandates to financing expanded coverage – as Senate leader Harry Reid scrounges for votes. On energy, the president will make big promises at Copenhagen even though cap-and-trade looks stillborn in the Senate.

As for financial reform, Senate banking committee chair Chris Dodd has proposed sweeping changes, while the Tim Geithner-Barney Frank version in the House seems beamed in from a universe where the credit crisis never happened. Compromise could prove elusive. Even Obama’s tax reform panel has delayed releasing its findings.

The thing you have to understand about business is that finding and hiring an employee is an expensive process. If this employee has to be laid off later because of government increasing tax rates or regulations, then that layoff poisons the atmosphere in the entire company. If you want businesses to feel comfortable about hiring, you need to convince them that you aren’t going to raise their taxes or expenses, unionize their work force, fine them for hurting the environment, or pass laws that encourage their employees to sue them for being offended, etc.

Legislative initiatives like card-check, health care mandates, cap-and-trade, ENDA, increased government spending, tariffs, “pay equity” laws, restrictions on executive salaries, capital gains tax hikes, etc., make businesses very risk-averse about hiring decisions. If Obama wants to attack businesses, these businesses may just leave the USA and set up shop elsewhere. But more likely they will just stay here and avoid hiring any new employees until the 2012 election.

News

Boeing builds new 787 plant in South Carolina to escape Washington Democrats

Leave a comment

You can’t pass regulations and taxes on corporations and then expect them to supply residents of your state with jobs. They will move to another state, and eventually, to another country.

Consider this commentary from Illiquid Assets. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Two stories jumped out at me this morning the first was Boeing backing up its warning to Washington State politicians that they needed to reform the business environment and taxation model or lose future business investment and jobs. The response from the State was a whole new plan with localized Cap and Trade via the Western Climate Initiative, no reform of labor laws that allowed a protracted Union strike that shut down Boeing just as the world was starting its slip into recession combined with and other Green initiatives sure to drive up operating and labor costs. So Boeing has decided to open the second assembly line for the 787, not in Washington State, but in South Carolina and the politicians in Olympia claim they did not see it coming. South Carolina has a lower tax rate and a “Right to Work” law that means you do not have to join a union to work at a union business.

A right-to-work law means that the corporation does not have to be shackled by the demands of corrupt leftist unions, who are largely responsible for driving the American auto industry into the ground, in my opinion.

And now, consider this statement from Republican State Rep. Dan Christiansen. (H/T Sound Politics via iPandora)

Excerpt:

It’s extremely disappointing that Boeing has chosen South Carolina over Washington, but not surprising at all. Boeing has been very critical of our state’s difficult regulatory atmosphere. At the end of the day, it has to be able to compete successfully on an international scale, especially against Airbus. Instead of providing a level playing field, Washington has consistently put up barriers that make it difficult not only for Boeing to compete, but also for other employers throughout our state.

It’s been no secret that other states have been courting Boeing for years. Boeing has tried to make it work here. However, it has gotten to a point with unemployment insurance issues, regulatory burdens, business and occupation taxes, and recently, the governor being willing to consider tax increases, that Washington is no longer a place where Boeing can be competitive.

In South Carolina, it took only days for Boeing to get the permits it needs to move forward with the second 787 plant. In Washington, it would take years. That’s one of many examples in which our state has not been helpful and has stood in the way of the ability for Boeing to successfully compete here.

When Boeing decided several years ago to move its headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, many of my House Republican colleagues and I warned that unless the Legislature was willing to make reforms to improve the state’s business climate, we may see further departures. The governor and the majority party have been in denial about concerns of job providers and now our predictions are unfortunately coming true.

We must also remember this is not just about Boeing. Many other employers rely on Boeing and its workforce to support their companies. Hundreds of thousands of jobs in Washington are indirectly related to Boeing and are affected. I’ve been very critical not only about how our state has treated Boeing, but all employers in Washington. Even when the Legislature made concessions to Boeing in 2003 to secure the Dreamliner in our state, I also said we should extend those tax relief benefits to all businesses. Unfortunately, very little has been done in the Legislature to make Washington attractive for business.

Today’s announcement needs to be a wake-up call to our political leaders in Washington to create a more competitive business climate before we lose more employers to other states.

(Click through to the article for another view)

Eventually, maybe the American people will realize that they can’t attack “big corporations” without facing the consequences. Until then, Democrats will keep raising taxes and adding regulations that causes business to shift jobs to low-tax states, and eventually, overseas. Outsourcing is caused by Democrats who are hostile to businesses. Unemployment is caused by Democrats who are hostile to businesses.