Of course Obama is good for business. He has cut taxes for the lower and middle class. The best way for business to grow in this environment is to improve demand for their goods and services. Then they have customers. Our problem is not supply but demand. Giving more money to the top instead just results in more deficits and flight of the capital to more rewarding offshore investments. We saw that for 8 years when the $2.5 trillion tax cuts turned a surplus into a deficit and in the sum total created net negative jobs over its span when adjusted for population growth.

Is that rain on the back of my neck or trickle-down?

Don't piss on my leg and call it trickle-down economics!!!

I thought it was old white dude spittle.

Corporate profits - not corporate "growth".

Queue a reasonable reason why corporations are not growing the economy other than uncertainty caused by all of Obama's new legislation, rules, regulations, policies, new departments, ........ they don't even know what their taxes are going to be!.........Gridlock never sounded so good to corporations.........no trade agreements, then dumping $600 billion, currency war, the G-20, value of the dollar, shutting down our energy industry in the Gulf/etc., gas prices soaring ...... N. Korea showing us their new nuclear facilities then shelling S. Korea the next ......

Yea, I know.. I'm a tea bagging racist and it's all Bush's fault.

But hey, not all bad news. It seems the media is trying to float a new excuse for Obama - The job of being President has got to the point where it is just to be big for one man.

Certainly to big for one man (I can think of).

The last time I heard that the country was ungovernable, and that the presidency was too big for one man, the president was none other than Jimmy Carter.

I am not surprised that the left has dug up this excuse again.

no joe, no bo, nj,

JoAnnaSmith1

two more countrys heard from.

The last time I heard that the country was ungovernable, and that the presidency was too big for one man, the president was none other than Jimmy Carter.

You must have been asleep while Bush was president.

hmmmm! Seems to me that all the conditions are there for these businesses to grow the economy and create jobs. but bob you say:

Corporate profits - not corporate "growth".

Queue a reasonable reason why corporations are not growing the economy other than uncertainty caused by all of Obama's new legislation, rules, regulations, policies, new departments, ........ they don't even know what their taxes are going to be!.........Gridlock never sounded so good to corporations.

Bob you want to blame it on gridlock but the only thing i see they have a lock on is their wallets and using the excuse of uncertainty. How the hell can you be uncertain about whats going on when for seven straight months you have had record profits?

Must be all that socialism, huh?

I see Mr. Me First Bill has joined us... lmao...

Care for some Cheese Whiz?

Don't worry drive-by, the conservatypes will find some way to spin this that reflects negatively on Obama. Some guy named Bill gave a weak attempt below. Failed miserably though.

Indy Lib,

To quote Joannasmith and No Jo, Obama is anti business, did you here, this story has got to be wrong, how the hell is business doing great with a president who is a socialist, communist, fascist, and everything else in the book.

According to what i have read, business is getting by with what they have, Now they have lay-ed off so many, people are working longer hours and are more productive and business is loving it.

I know what you mean Jeff. Now if we can just go back to using child labor, business could make even huger profits.

According to what i have read, business is getting by with what they have, Now they have lay-ed off so many, people are working longer hours and are more productive and business is loving it

BINGO Jeff! We have a WINNER!

Employees are expected to do the J O B S of 2 or 3 people and told if they don't like it LEAVE!

PS: Don't give them any ideas Indy! lol

Guys the company i'm with now, after being layed off for the first time in 18 years, makes me work 10 hour days or 50 hours a week, the last company i worked for i worked 40 hours. i took a 25k pay cut to work 10 more hours a week, hell yea business is making money left and right. Now to mention they PROMISED me a raise after 90 days, Guess what, the raise never happened and I'm still working 50 hours a week.

YOU GO BUSINESS!!!!!

Borrowing trillions, printing hundreds of billions of dollars, and spending borrowed money while producing nothing (as in the constant extensions of unemployment benefits) will catch up to the economy in time. There will be a short term bump in profits, and a short term bump in the stock market, why wouldn't there be? You throw trillions of borrowed money into the system, and that will happen. Sooner or later, that money needs to paid back, or at least the debt needs to be serviced, and that money will start leak back to government,. And unless economic growth can compensate for paying for that borrowed money, businesses profits will decline, layoffs will occur, and the market will also decline.

Uh OH!

Looks like the large mouth a@@ got a whiff of the Cheese Whiz... lol

shouldda used stink-bait on a trebil hook. You'd have caught 'er a lot sooner.

JoAnnaSmith1

Borrowing trillions, printing hundreds of billions of dollars, and spending borrowed money while producing nothing (as in the constant extensions of unemployment benefits) will catch up to the economy in time. There will be a short term bump in profits, and a short term bump in the stock market, why wouldn't there be?

Reading must be a skill, Joanna says this is a term Bump in profits, but she did not see this part of the artical, Joanna please read and re-read these articals, i'm going to paste this from above, so you can see it again!!!! My God!!!!

Corporate profits have been going gangbusters for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history.

See that Joanna, 7 consecutive quarters, that is not a term bump, truth is that business profits have been going great since Obama took office, if we have 4 quarters in a business year, and he has been in office 2 years, that means(listion closely) business has been making big profits since he took office 8 quarters ago. but since your a part time tea party, right wing ultra consertive these numbers can't be true!!!!

Jeff - growth is anemic. It's only 2.5% for the year, the initial projections for the year had been in the 3% to 3.5% range, but the economy didn't come through. And this is with Obama's borrowed money being used to prop it up. Think where it would be without it.

Next year the Fed projects more anemic growth, again in the 3% to 3.5% range. That won't even make a dent in the unemployment rate, in fact it may even go up.

So you hang on to your 7 consecutive quarters of so called growth Jeff. The country is barely above going back into recession, and to most people that just isn't good enough.

Source for GDP growth: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101123/ap_on_bi_ge/us_fed_forecast

Joanna, their you go again, changing the subject, see reading is a skill, a skill you just don't have!!!!

read the artical, read it, take it to the toilet and read it as you take a crap,

Corporate profits have been going gangbusters for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history.

maybe after you clear you bowles out, this artical will make since.

No matter how you TRY and spin this, business is making record profits for the last 7 quarters, that mean that from the first quarter of 09 till last quarter they are maing profits like gangbusters. Sorry Joanna this you can't spin!!!!

Joanna.

So you hang on to your 7 consecutive quarters of so called growth Jeff. The country is barely above going back into recession, and to most people that just isn't good enough.

Growth and business profits are 2 different things, During the reagan recovery that was considered a job less recovery and everybody did not seem to care because business was making alot of money. the economy is not growing at a desent rate because business is not hiring, but at the same time while business is not hiring, that has nothing to do with their profits.

Joanna please take micro-ecnomics 101 that just might explain this complicated data!!!!

talking to you is like pissing up a rope.

DBO... Will you cap the Cheese Whiz already...

This placing is staring to crawl with the critters... lol

7 Quarters of Consecutive Growth. So what Jeff is saying is that the economy started to recover in January of 2009. If the recovery started in January, there was no need for the stimulus bill. Jeff has just made a Republican point.

Sure, don't you remember the summer of recovery???

Blue skies smilin at me...Nothin but blue skies do I see. Never saw the sun shinin so bright. Never saw things goin so right.

Just ask all those laid off people about their hope these days. Tell them that things are on the upswing. I'm sure they all will agree with you. And we owe it all to the wonderful wizard in the white house.

Just proves the point I have been making for months...if Obama turned the streets to gold, Repubs would bitch about the glare. Save your breath on joanna,,,,,

auto bailouts........

troops outta Iraq..........

neutered insurance and credit card companies......

improved relations with foreign countries (even the allies bush alienated)........

gaining respect globally (when we can keep odonnell,palin,etc of front page).....

Businesses--- 100% exemption from CG taxes and credit towards new equipment purchases

The list is long, but do not expect recognition from right because to do so will cost them beck/limbaugh credits

The reason profits are up?? The businesses found out that all the deadwood employees that they laid off weren't really needed anyway. Also, when they realized that the Republicans were going to regain so many seats in the house and senate, that simply bolstered their confidence. They immediately phoned their factories in Taiwan and India to step up production and lets get the goods shipped over here on the very next freighter. Got it on Wall Mart and Target's shelves immediately.

We can effectively reduce government spending by outsourcing government employees to the private sector. Bet more can be accomplished more effectively with greater results.

In our economy today, do we really need to have union interference with business? In CA we have proven that work can be completed faster and better than without union bids. But, gov. requires it. Sad loss of lower project costs.

Don't your arms get tired from stretching that far?

No. Care to try your hand at a thoughtful rebuttal?

Is that reverse psychology?

"Wow, something really good happened because we think this guy sucks!"

Hmm...hardly sounds like compelling reasoning.

Nah, I only reserve those for thoughtful posts.

When the government injects a trillion dollars of borrowed money into the economic system through all it's so called stimulus plans, when the Fed does the same while printing more money with it's quantitative easing scheme, when Obama buys General Motors at a premium price and huge loss to taxpayers, again with borrowed money, when hundreds of billions of dollars of even more borrowed money are spent to shore up unemployment benefits, saving teachers jobs (even though it didn't), and saving state government jobs, that money has to go somewhere, and it's turned into profits for businesses.

Bill, Fairfax, VA is correct, private companies are doing more with less, and they are not hiring. And the money they are making is based all on borrowed money. Not the best foundation, and probably the worst foundation, to build the profits from. In short, it's a house of cards, and just like the housing market bubble, except this time it's a business bubble, it too will fail.

And what the government giveth, the government can taketh away. And the government will do so with higher taxes for Obamacare, mountains of new regulations, and the expiring Bush tax cuts. Business's know that, and that is why they don't hire.

Sorry Bill,

I didn't go down the page before posting above.

You are one smart guy.

Joanna, I admit to not being a big fan of how the Bush/Obama bailouts were handled. As it happened, that money just wound up in the hands of the rich. If it had been evenly distributed to every homeowner, I could have paid off my mortgage with enough left over to buy some cool new stuff. The money would have still ended up with the rich anyway, I wouldn't have a mortgage, and I'd have some cool new stuff; everybody wins, YIPPEE! I guess no one wants to think about demand-side economics though.

We'd like to dedicate this next blest from the past to Me First Bill and his date Joanna:

The Monkeys hit "I'm a believer", which includes our dating couple's favoirte 'line-to-live- by'; "...when I needed sunshine, I got rain".

Gotta just love those optimists, doncha, gang!

JoAnnaSmith1

Honey please put down the crack pipe, Bong, Needle or how ever you are getting high, your argument is completely ass backwards, if business was saddles with all the regs, rules, they would not be making money.
second, business were having problems getting loans from banks not too long ago, so they have used their own saving from trimming there work forces end result Higher profits.
I'm a classic example of what business is doing right now, they are not hiring because they are making people like me work longer hours for less pay, since i was layed off in January, i now work 50 hours weeks for 25k less per year. so Joanna, as much as you blame Obama for everything and call him everything, this time your WRONG!!!!! like every other time.

lets face it, Obama is not that anti business president you and NoJo talk about, given the tax cuts in the stimulus to business and now we see profits are at a all time high, Most in 60 years, profits have grown in the last 7 quaters. George Bush wishes profits were like this when he was president.

Eat Crow Joanna.

To further expand on my point, if you put money into the middle class, they will spend it, thus increasing demand for goods. Increased demand means increased employment as companies hire more folks to meet demand. I like to call this "flow-up" economics. We gave trickle down a try, lets try flow up. What can we lose at this point.

Indy Lib - I guess no one wants to think about demand-side economics though.

That's kind of what Obama did though, with all the unemployment extensions, and with the housing rebates, I believe it was $8K for those that qualified. Getting money into people's hands, hoping they would spend it on consumer goods and services. Didn't work. They paid off their mounting debt instead.

DBO - We'd like to dedicate this next blest from the past to Me First Bill and his date Joanna:

Just trying to explain complex problems to simple minds. Apparently though we haven't dumbed it down enough for you.

Joanna, the pennies tossed to the huddling masses was nothing compared to the hundreds of billions lobbed to the rich. If the bailouts had gone to the middle class, the rich would have ended up with it anyway, whether through consumer spending or paying off debt. In my scenario, we all win; as it happened, only the rich won.

And business is thriving because they can demand their workers do 2-3 people's jobs, work them longer hours and squeeze every ounce of energy out of them because with high unemployment, employees are expendable.

Bill _FAIRFAX

"Obama is perceived as being bad for business."

Just another lie that has taken ona life of it's own.

It is GREED plain and simple.

Corporate GREED! They will not hire in order to pad the bottom line.

No one has a crystal ball that could assure these a$$h!!!! about the future ...it is just a lame excuse that they are not hiring because "Obama is bad for business due to uncertainty".

Seriously?

Bill,

A thoughtful rebuttal would imply that you presented facts that could be countered with other, contrary facts. Unfortunately your little "yeah but it wasn't corporate growth ergo Obama sucks" rant was quite short on facts and, after skipping over the positive news (I'm sure that was all because the business community just knew there'd be their trusty republicans put in place to save the economic day) you were quite long on your opinions about why there isn't equally impressive job growth.

Let me try to counter that part of your rant that almost injected facts. Business isn't expanding (to use your junior high drama inducer) ... drum roll please .... because there's no demand. Duh!! It's that whole supply and demand equation. You make the ridiculous statement that business is squeezing out nice profits by operating more efficiently (i.e. laying off workers) rather than by expanding because ... Obama is perceived as being bad for business? Seriously? So if I'm following your rant you're saying that if Obama was perceived as good for business, businesses would be operating less efficiently and doing the same or less with more people just because? I really can't figure where to start deconstructing that idiocy other than just to look back at it in utter amazement.

Businesses aren't hiring because there's no demand. It's no more complicated than that actually. And even if the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 per year are extended, they won't be hiring any more people unless there's a demand for their products or services. Are you following this so far?

I think your uncertain tax policy argument is ridiculous. First, I think Obama has been remarkably consistent on that. He wants the Bush tax cuts to expire for those making more than $250,000. I'd say it's the Republicans vowing to fight the expiration is the uncertainty of which you speak. Further, do you really think that if there was the increased demand for someone's products or services that they'd forgo the opportunity to hire more people and increase their profits because they'd pay between 3% and 4.6% more in taxes? Really? So you're thinking that this uncertainty about only making 60.4% on income over $373,650 instead of the 65% is keeping them from hiring? That's some pretty tortured logic, even for you.

And with respect to your Obama agenda that thinks regulating economic activity is a good idea, despite the costs statement I'd prefer that you and your ilk pick a side on this one and stick with it. Be it financial, banking, or environmental, either say that (i) Obama's failure to regulate these industries caused the massive financial collapse, created an unfriendly lending environment and resulted in the worst domestic oil spill in history or (ii) say that Obama's over-regulation is stalling growth and impeding commerce. One or the other! Which you pick doesn't matter, but logically you can't rationally assert both. But maybe context, rationality and integrity don't have any room in your rant. Fair enough.

No need to dumb it down for me, cutie-face. You would squawk if they hung you with a new rope, as they used to say when I was a kid. From a near depression, to 2 or 2.5 % growth STILL beats the depression, and is movement in the correct direction. What- things were supposed to skyrocket overnight, like they will under the Repubs?? They WILL skyrocket, now, won't they??

Don't forget the bonuses for top management!! This will be a big year for them.

And Jeff - I have been working 50 to 60 hours a week for almost 20 years now. But you know I'm deadbeat Democrat out to bilk the system - just like all those other worthless democrats.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Elise, SF

Don't forget the bonuses for top management!! This will be a big year for them.

And Jeff - I have been working 50 to 60 hours a week for almost 20 years now. But you know I'm deadbeat Democrat out to bilk the system - just like all those other worthless democrats.

my only problem with this is that when i took this garbage job, they never told me my work hours till i started, i don't have a problem putting in any hours to get the job done, but with this company makes it mandatory even if there is nothing to do, like now. they took advantage of a weak job market as well as promising me a raise to get me to come here, 1000 miles from chicago and never mention it. i drought up my raise but i was told that i should be lucky to be working and be thankful for what i have. typical business.

President Obama recently admitted his rhetoric has caused him to be perceived as bad for business.

From the Huffington Post: He said he realizes he needs to make clear to the business community, and the country, that the most important thing the administration can do is to boost and encourage the business sector and make sure businesses can hire.

He said setting the right tone publicly is important and could make a difference in how businesses decide to spend their money. The president said that setting that tone is one of the things he didn't manage as well as he needed to.

The President has admitted his mistake, which puts him a step above his followers.

Right Bill,

In a nutshell, businesses that aren't huge can't take the chance of going out of business. They are waiting for some very clear policy message from this administration so they can plan ahead for the next 3 to 5 years. They are being kept in the dark about what is coming and can't afford to take chances.

The tax issue is just a red herring! For years they knew what the tax rates were going back to when the cuts expired, so plan for that! What's so confusing about knowing that at a certain date my taxes are to be xyz!

Yes somethings have to be made so complicated because long range cost analysis figure into the profitability of the company dictating the the reasonance of the labor force in order to facilitate the liquidity of assets based on consumer viability and logistical stability of the liability based margins.

Its all just BS.

They tax profits don't they? Low profit is better than no profit. Some Return on Investment is better than No Return on Investment. And don't you get to write off your loses?

It is also a vicious circle. Where businesses don't want to expand because they do not if demand will grow. So demand does not increase because not enough people will have enough to spend because businesses will not expand.

Yes paul, they tax profits, so you do something else with the money. Buy something that can be called a business expense. A new SUV, a new helicopter, a corporate jet. Remodel your offices, buy all new computers. Go on more "business trips", and certainly eat more business lunches and dinners. How about a luxury condo in Maui or Vegas for you travelling customers to rest up in for a few days?

SarahMus,

Here's a larger view of the vicious circle. We can't compete with workers in the third world making $2.00 a day and no benefits. So our manufacturing base moves to these sh!tholes of the world. We end up out of work, which really means out of money. Ok, here's the rub. We are the market for the entire world. These goods made overseas must be sold here. We are the greatest consumers in the entire world. Now eventually this will have to come full circle. So what is the end result?? Anybody's guess.

We become the slaves for the growing middle class in Asia.

I think the Republicans (along with Rush Limbaugh) are disappointed we did not have a depression. Obama has been very successful considering the train wreck he was handed, and this for some reason has a lot of people angry. I'm puzzled - is it because he's black, or a Democrat, or not Sarah Palin? C'mon people - let's revel in the good news and get back to work continuing to fix the bad.

Great post, Pat. I don't think the problem will be President Obama giving in but Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and friends--the blue dog nemesis.

Okay Pat,

Her's the newest results from the Edward's Foundation Poll on that health care issue: 99.9999% opposed to it. 100.00% have no idea whats in it

These are very reliable statistics from the poll I just held. You betcha.

I've read a lot of the healthcare law and a lot about it and sort of believe I might understand at least some of it. There's a lot of good stuff in it - including over 200 Republican amendments. There is some stuff in it I don't like, but I think it can be fixed rather than dumped. Plus, according to the CBO it will reduce the deficit. It will probably improve the lives of most of the people following this thread.

Sorry Reinhardt,

It's the other way around. Our wages will have to match theirs, or the factories will stay right there.

That or we could always drop tariffs the size of your mom's ass on all imported goods~

You want to hear screams that will be a noise tsunami?? Just mention tariffs. That is the one subject that would bring on WWIII.

Nice fear-mongering, Edward. Right now, we can win WWIII. And the Chinese know that. We should make the tariffs retroactive, and retire our debt to them tomorrow.

Paul,

I remember about twelve years ago we wanted to impose a tariff of some specialty steels. Not all steel products, just a few specialty steel products. And WOW the reaction was enormous. With a trade war threatened and so on. We backed down immediately, and nothing was ever mentioned again.

You don't attempt to compete with slave labor and slave wages, you regulate them out of existence. Unless you are racing to the bottom and selling your own countrymen out to the lowest forms of life, enslavers.

All evidence to the contrary...according to the nay-sayers like Bill and Joanna, they aren't going to hire workers 'cause they're a-scared of The Big Bad Obama!

Sorry, that's a cop and they know it...it's a reasoning that could easily be interpreted as big business giving us the finger and saying, "You should have voted for McCain so no new jobs for you!"

Deb and Da Noid,

Both your posts are way too simplistic. Deb sounds like a little girl who expects Santa to be coming soon because it's snowing outside.

DaNoid, You need to read my post#4.21 (so I don't have to write it again just for you)

Link corporate tax rates and the uppermost individual tax rate to whatever the unemployment number is.

For individuals over $3million the unemployment rate times 9.9.

For corporations, not humans who have incorporated themselves, 30% plus the unemployment rate times 5, for all profits over 50 million.

not individual humans..........

Asia and Mexico mostly, insofar as I'm aware.

Jennifer,

I'll kiss you if it will make you feel better. That said, what do you mean by "pushing corporations for job creation"??? You realize that workers are just a necessary evil. that if any job can be performed in a cheaper way...by an overseas worker, by a robot, by an illegal alien, then that's where the job will go. Why does it cost more to perform a unit of work. Say, installing a screw, in the USA than in India??? Same amount of work, same screw, same tools. So why??? Businesses are in business to make money...PERIOD. Not to provide jobs, not to provide pensions, not to provide anything. Ford Motor Company is not in business to build cars and trucks...They are in business to make money. Building cars and trucks is just the method they chose to make that money.

So basically it doesn't matter if a company is destroying the nation that plays host to it so long as it turns a profit, amirite?

If we're going to excuse behavior based on inherent nature, I s'pose I should get a free pass on setting the home offices of AT&T ablaze for want of my deep-seated pyromania.

"make money"

In reality what businesses are trying to do is to corral capital. The FED, the Treasury, and the Minting and Printing Office are the ones who MAKE Money. The rest of us are playing a game of cut throat Monopoly with their reserve note fiat currency funny money. The banksters are laughing at us as we fight over their scraps.

No Exodite,

Arson is a crime. Making money in the world of business is perfectly legal. And yes, profit, the most profit possible is what it's all about. Just read the prospectus of any company you want. It couldn't be more clear. This is capitalism, and it has brought us the highest standard of living in the world. The business of America is business. As a company gets really large, they may even contribute some percentage of their profits to charity. I know Wall Mart does, and so does McDonalds. But they all have a commitment to their stockholders to make as much profit as possible every year.

but it does because they will claim credit....mark these words

C'mon fellas,

You all know by now how the game is played. If I'm in office, and something good happens anywhere in the world, I will instantly take full credit for it. If something bad happens, I would just blame it on Bush. ( or Clinton, Or Reagan, or Carter, or even FDR ). Pretty simple politics for the masses. You betcha.

It is called currency for a reason. It is supposed to flow through the economy. We should have a use it or lose it tax policy so long as the country is in debt.