It's like. Anything these presidents sign in or make legal , never works out for the people. Divided states if America is a dream cone true for tyrants
Lol wait, so tax the business that other countries do between themselves? Have fun forcing companies in other countries to give up their money. Or Increase tariffs on imports to the US? Increasing tariffs causing the cost of production in the countries having the tariffs imposed to rise, leading to less products being exported, leading to higher unemployment. Not to mention those countries wont want to business do with you anymore. The country imposing the tariffs will see the costs of those goods rise, more money taken from the consumer, and possible unemployment rising. You really dont grasp economics if your answer to bring manufacturing back to America is taxation, or if you think that will increase productivity.
I know that oil consumption is too high. I know that pollution is a real and present danger. I know that outsourced labor is often cheaper. I know that commerce relys on the military way too much and costs each of us to supplement their trade routes protection. I know that if there were trade restrictions in place tht would force production in locales of consumption, we would all be better off. I know that would increase manufacturing,and yes goods may raise a little, but the economy and employment would be better.
The whole "this will allow people the freedom to work less" is purely spin in response to the CBO analysis, and we all know it. Never before was "freedom to work less" a proposed tenet of the Bill. This is purely a response to the CBO. The fact that people in here are just regurgitating it is kind of sad.
The two are not mutually exclusive. Never had we heard before that this was a desired outcome. Less work.... This was not a proposed result of the Bill. "Americans will work less. Support the ACA." Again, purely a response to new, unfolding information.
Not to mention no country just bends over when you enforce a tariff. They respond with their own. Can we please have an economics forum? Pretty please moderators?
No one has claimed it was a planned part of the ACA. It is an assumption that was considered by CBO when preparing their analysis though (Which you claimed the spin came about after. It did not).
"In response to the analysis" meaning the numerical analysis. Maybe that wasn't clear. I have yet to hear of any other bill that results in less work in America and people considering it a positive.
Thanks for the clarity. Actually it can be a good thing. If they want less hours or the chance to retire/take care of children, then that job is open for someone that may currently be unemployed. Plus if that is desired, then they feel as though their quality of life has improved.
I respect your opinion, but I just don't buy it. We have more matching problems than we would require for each open job to be taken by another person. That's not statistically feasible in any diverse, specialized economy. Off to work now. Or maybe I shouldn't go so that my healthcare will be subsidized.
I bet 100% of his lobbyist are satisfied. You know, the only people politicians care about. Hence, he's playing his part. 80%? Whats that number come from? I don't care about fools that vote for masters to run their lives.