When Will the New House Republicans Start Working on Creating Jobs?

Government trying to FORCE something on business is what screws up the economy worse than any other factor. If people in government knew ANYTHING about business or understood anything about business, they would be in business and making REAL money instead of working in the government. The Housing bubble is a direct result of government sticking its incompetent nose into business. Cash for Clunkers wasted billions and the net result was screwing up the used car market to the detriment of the poor.
Whenever government tries to force business into something, business pushes back and looks for ways around the government regs. And being much much wiser than any government trogs, they FIND those ways.
If you want business to act in a certain way, MAKE IT PROFITABLE, for them to act that way. Want trillions brought back onshore? Eliminate corporate taxes. Zero. Companies will bring money back here and foreign companies will also choose to make things here rather than ship things here. And since the consumer pays every cent of corporate taxes anyway, there is no great loss.

 

The government's interest and purpose is not to promote and protect the welfare of business but of all the people. Where the welfare of business comes into conflict with the welfare of the people the government is obliged to take the side of the people.

Your position seems to be predicated on the belief that what is good for business is also good for all the people, a peculiarly ignorant view of history.

 

Where is the conflict between the people and business? The only conflict is an artificially created one by class warfare promoting liberal/communists desperately seeking to retain political power OVER the people. The conflict is between the government and the people. NOT between business and the people.

The OccupyWS gang of thugs is being compared to the tea party.
BOTH have protested AGAINST bailouts.

The difference? The tea party says NO ONE should get a bailout, no one is too big to fail.

The Occupy mob says, "The banks got a bailout, WHERE'S OURS?"

That nation crushing attitude was created by government, not business.

 

They started work on creating jobs? When?

 

Here again on the Housing bubble, I think you have been listening to the wrong people. I don't think you really understand what happened, Well, Listen Up.....At the time I was living in Florida getting ready to move to Indiana . I got lucky and was selling at just the right time. This thing has really hit Florida hard. The problem was really caused by County Gov't. For many years when you looked at your tax bill , the appraised value was always low. Then in the late 80s countiy's decide to appraise at market value so they could collect more in property taxes. So .... appraisd values went up, and up and up. County gov't had discoved a gold mine. A friend of mine came up to visit and was telling me " I paid $60,000 for my property 3 years ago and now it is (apraised) worth 130,000. So........ he decides to refinance as intrest rats have gone down. Why not just go ahead and refinance it for 100,00. He could put 40,000 in his pocket and still have 30,000 in equity in his house. What a sweet deal. But then you start noticing that your taxes on your house are almost as much as your payment. Maybe its time to sell and cash in on this baby. HUH, nobody wants to give you more than 60,000, and you owe 100,000 on it. Wow, your in trouble . The lenders got caught up in this and are not blameless, but County gov't was at the root of this problem. I had friends and a daughter who got caugt up in this.

 

As soon as they no longer have to play defense against a President (and the rest of the government) intent on spending money we don't have until our government collapses.

 

You have less than a clue. I own or have owned houses, or condos, in Florida [8] CA [2] PA [16] OH [3] CO [2]

The one CA house I bought for $47,9. Sold it for $253,000. Just before the bubble burst it was on the market for $1.2 million. 14 of the 16 PA houses were slum rental houses, BEFORE, CRA. I am white, have good credit, and excellent income. On NONE of those houses was there ANY chance of a loan. They had to be bought for cash, fixed up, rented out, and eventually sold, all for cash. Average prices for a house that could be made into 4 rental apartments was under $3000. CRA jumped those houses to $15,000 or better. When the bottom end gets artificially inflated, the inflation travels upwards, growing all the way. And the Ca houses had Prop 13 restricting property tax increases. Local events had nothing to do with the housing bubble. It was all caused by politicians trying to buy votes and intruding into business where they have no clue.

 

You mean that dozen+ bills designed to give the speculators more cash with which to speculate about job creation offshore? Those bills?

 

This whole housing bubble was houses being overvalued and loans made on them and all of a sudden you realize it is not worth what is owed on the house. I not talking buying slum houses or someone trying to make a fast buck. I'm talking normal houses that people buy to live in. The way they got overpriced was by county gov't appraising them at a high rate to increase their tax revenue. That is where it started. The lenders got suckered into believing them. Why else would you loan 100,000 on a home worth 50,000 ? According to you, it was to buy votes. OR the federal gov't made them. I don't think so. You might have a lot of money, But I don't believe you used your superior brain to earn it. You either inherited it or was given it by someone. Its kind of funny how someone who is given money all of a sudden becomes super smart.

 

You really did't respond to my post, So let me ask you a question. In my example of my friend telling me his house had increased in value from 60 to 130,000. Where did he get that silly idea from? From the federal gov't? From a bank? No, it was from county gov't when they sent him a tax bill on the new amount of their apprasial. That is why he thought it was worth 130,000. that is why the lender thought it was worth 130,000 when he went in to refinance. That is why they lent him the money. That is why we have had so many foreclosures. And that is where it all started. As a parting note on your Cash for Clunkers comment about it disruptiing the used car business. No, what is causing that is the New Car dealers have started selling many more used cars than new. They used to wholesale most trade ins to used car dealers. With the slowdown in new car sales they have taken over the used car market. In this recession people are driving their cars til the wheels fall off and then buying used unless they are wealthy like you.

 

The poor are NOT buying used new model cars from dealers. They are driving the wheels off their old cars because there are no good, older used cars for them to get into. Here's a thought about the Govt and automobiles. 150 children suffer Anaphylactic shock from peanuts every year. Many of them die, so the government REQUIRES severe warnings about peanuts. The NHTSD admits that the newer lighter fuel efficient cars they have LEGISLATED into popularity, DO cause an additional 2000 highway deaths each years in accidents with heavier vehicles. That is the government chocking on gnats and swallowing elephants.

Local governments do property assessments to determine the property tax. As the market became inflated, local govts rode the gravy train like everyone else. But the county tax assessor is not the one that CAUSED the bubble, they reacted to it. After my house was destroyed by Hurricane Jeanne the property tax fell to a tiny figure. After it was rebuilt, the assessment jumped back up. After the bubble burst, it has dropped beck down. ALL reactions TO a market, in no way SETTING a market.

 

Lenders have their own assessors. They aren't going to use the government's figures; they aren't that stupid. I'll give you three "F" words to explain the root cause of the problem: Fannie, Freddie and Frank (as in Barney Frank).

 

Yes,I agree ,Lenders arn't going to use gov't figures. They do have their own assessors. They are the ones who put the value on the overpriced homes. Fanny and Freddie did not send a assessor out. They merely guarranteed the loan. They assumed the lenders assessors knew what they were doing. They in turn assumed that the county assessors knew what they were doing when they kept raising their assessemts of the property. Sales agents will encourage assessors to assess the property high because that determines how much cash the lender will cough up. An assessor will look at the county assessment and say, if the county says it is worth this much, I guess it is OK to appraise it that high. So tell me that the lendeers don't consider the county assessment when figuring theirs. I'm sure Fannie and Freddie had a role in the problem, They should have double checked all the loans that were bundled up and passed on to them by the big banks with the assurrance that thes were good loans. Seems to me a little more regulation of the banking system was in order. The banks got their money at the expense of the taxpayers. The Republicans were all for bailing out the banks, then turn around and blame Obama for the deficit when it cost so much. Now they say to deregulate is the answer. Thats what got us there in the firs place. One thing in life that you need to learn is you need to watch the money real close. the minute you just trust someone to do the right thing, you are going to get shafted, and we all got shafted and it started with yor county assessor overpricing property so the county could collect more taxes. I'm not saying they caused all of this on purpose, It just snowballed out of controll. But, if you trace it back, that is were it leads to.

 

We could go round and round on whether they are reacting to the market or setting it, kinda like which came first, the egg or the chicken. You still have a hard time answeing a question ,but thats OK. I'm not sure I quite get your point when it comes to cars and peanuts. Maybe we should just all drive big trucks an be safe. Trouble with that is if the economy keeps going downhill, we are going to be riding bicyles. You'll really be in deep do-do if you collide with a truck.Maybe we should outlaw all vehicles and just walk. That would be safer.
One final point. It only makes sense that your assessment dropped after a hurricane smashed it. Then went back up when you rebuilt. That is not a reaction to the market, that is a reaction to a hurricane. They can be brutal.

 

There is some truth to your argument. You failed to address the third and most relevant "F". Any comment on the "honorable" former chairman of the House Financial Services Committee?

 

THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO CREATE JOBS! Get it through your thick head already!

 

Dan, I find it disturbing that we seem to disagree or have a different view on everything. Surely we can find something we agree on. You have the attitude that we LEGISLATED into popularity lighter fuel efficiet cars. I don't see it quite that way. Its not like the gov't passed a law saying you must buy a small car. Or a law banning large cars. What they did was require them to make a car that gets beter fuel milage. Now, if they could build a better engine and put it in a large car, thats fine. Its the car makers that say we can't build a better engine, we will have to make a smaller car. OK Look, we just got through bailing out the auto industry. I know, you would say that was a mistake. The point is, the reason we had to bail them out was because the big 3 spent the 90s tooling for big SUVs which wer popular until 2004 when Katrina hit and gas shot to $4 a gal. Same thing happened in the 70s with the Arab fuel embargo. They just did'nt learn. So... this time we pas a law, not saying you cannot build big cars, but saying you must give people the option of a fuel efficient car. Just to avoid this problem in the future.Makes sense to me

 

The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) are regulations in the United States, first enacted by US Congress in 1975, and intended to improve the average fuel economy of cars


Historically, NHTSA has expressed concerns that automotive manufacturers will increase mileage by reducing vehicle weight, which might lead to weight disparities in the vehicle population and increased danger for occupants of lighter vehicles. However, vehicle safety ratings are now made available to consumers by NHTSA and by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. A National Research Council report found that the standards implemented in the 1970s and 1980s "probably resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993. A Harvard Center for Risk Analysis study found that CAFE standards led to "2,200 to 3,900 additional fatalities to motorists per year


CAFE standard was a failure and said it was like trying to fight obesity by requiring tailors to make only small-sized clothes.


" the authority the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 under EPCA, NHTSA has the authority to raise CAFE penalties to $100 per 1 mpg shortfall, PER VEHICLE SOLD."

All of which says, "If you build big cars, we will FINE you for every vehicle you sell!"

All of the above LEGISLATES mini cars into existence. If they have a reason to exist, the market will show that reason, not the government. I used the auto industry as an example of government intrusion into business where there government doesn't know what it is doing and where it does not belong.

This is exactly why the housing bubble came to be, Federal intrusion into the home mortgage business where their "good intentions" caused unintended consequences, a massive CRASH.

I'm an old fart now. When I was a youngster just starting out in the business world the standard joke about bankers was that, "To get a loan, you had to prove to the banker that you absolutely didn't need the money."

Another was that, "the first sign of maturity was when you realized that the person that wrote the bank advertisements was NOT the same person that approved the loans."

The government forced banks to become loose fisted, to everyone's detriment. There was a time when savings bank that took in customers money for savings accounts and then lent that money out for home loans were not permitted to hold any high risk, high return paper. Their home loans were their security and profit base. But that law was incompatible with making loans on substandard properties with substandard borrowers, so the Feds did away with that inconvenient law. And soon, the sub-prime came into being. Worthless is another name for sub-prime.

Defenders of the govt claim the govt did not invent the sub-prime loan. The govt created the conditions for it to exist and they did not STOP it from existing.

 

Again it was yor free market approach that got us into the bailout, not once but twice instead of using a common sense approach. Used car dealers cannot give away the big gas guzzlers but are getting top dollar for small fuel effiecient models. And..... No it not like trying to solve obesity by selling small clothes, but by selling only healthy food to people so they will not be obese. Plus.. those 75 laws no longer apply, they are now trying to pass new ones which are beng blocked by republicans

 

We need to get back on topic here and that is when are republicans going to create jobs. Leading up to the 2010 elections all you heard from the republicans was JOBS JOBS JOBS How they were going to create jobs if you elected them. Well, they won. Now they say it is not the job of gov't to create jobs. So... tonight when I watch th debate I know I'm going to hear all these guys tooting their own horn about all the jobs they crated while they were govonor. So which is it?

 

If you wish to argue with me, learn what you're talking about!

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/overview.htm


For what years and at what levels have the passenger car CAFE standards been set?

To meet the goal of doubling the 1974 passenger car fuel economy average by 1985 (to 27.5 mpg), Congress set fuel economy standards for some of the intervening years. Passenger car standards were established for MY 1978 (18 mpg); MY 1979 (19 mpg); MY 1980 (20 mpg); and for MY 1985 and thereafter (27.5 mpg). Congress left the level of 1981-84 standards to the Department to establish administratively. Subsequently, standards of 22, 24, 26, and 27 mpg were established. For the post-1985 period, Congress provided for the continued application of the 27.5 mpg standard for passenger cars, but gave the Department the authority to set higher or lower standards. From MY 1986 through 1989, the passenger car standards were lowered. Thereafter, in MY 1990, the passenger car standard was amended to 27.5 mpg, which it has remained at this level.

CAFE standards have NEVER been dropped since inception.

You are part of the problem, believing that the government is a benefit. Government is a burden that we have to bear. They should be restricted to doing those things that only the government may do. If the private sector does it, the government should stay out. You may believe the govt is some great good thing. I'm convinced that it is a necessary evil that is to be tolerated only and watched very closely at all times because it always represents a danger to freedom. All governments DO!

 

I stand corrected on CAFE. I find it interesting that it says no Aisian or Domestic automaker has ever paid a penalty.

 

There are reasons why US carmakers find it problematic to export their vehicles. CAFE standards are a big part of that. Other nations are unwiling to allow such inefficient vehicles on their roads. If the US government had raised CAFE standards to match those of the rest of the world US manufactured autos would not be at such a disadvantage these days.

 

The NHTSA admits that up to 3200 ADDITIONAL people are killed in collisions of lightweight fuel efficient vehicles with heavier vehicles.

21 deaths from listeria in COLORADO cantaloupes and every cantaloupes farm in the country has shut down because no one will buy a cantaloupe. But 3200 people killed by having fuel efficient cars is just, "the cost of doing the tree huggers business?"

I have traveled to Europe many, many times. I wouldn't consider renting an American car there. Not due to MPG but because it is next to impossible to get them through some ancient towns. Now on trips to Germany where I will spend much time going from place to place, Then its the big engined 180 mph M-B's BMW's or Porsche's.

And the EU has many 'exceptions and waivers' to its CAFE standards.