8 Important Economic Questions For The Presidential Debate!

[CRAZYDOLFAN305]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


2) Poverty: More than 46 million Americans — 15 percent of our population — now live at or below the federal poverty level, and the United States has one of the highest child poverty rates in the developed world. So why does Romney support a budget that takes 62 percent of its spending cuts from programs that help the poor? How would Obama protect the poor from spending cuts in any “grand bargain” deficit deal he might sign?

4) Mass transit: More Americans are using mass transit and driving less and less. But the U.S. mass transit system trails those of its peer nations, and fails to connect workers who need it most to their jobs. How would Romney square this increasing demand with his desire to cut funding for Amtrak? Does President Obama have any plans to push transit development beyond the infrastructure investments included in his never-passed American Jobs Act?

5) Income inequality: The level of inequality in the United States now rivals countries like Pakistan and the Ivory Coast. This inequality crushes economic mobility for America’s shrinking middle class and its growing number of working poor. Romney said that a focus on income inequality was “about envy” and said it should only be talked about in a quiet room. Does he view income inequality as a serious issue threatening the future of America’s economy, and if so, how do his policies address it? How would Obama bolster the lower- and middle classes and reduce the growth of inequality aside from increasing some tax rates on the richest Americans?

[WVDolphan]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


2) Poverty: More than 46 million Americans — 15 percent of our population — now live at or below the federal poverty level, and the United States has one of the highest child poverty rates in the developed world. So why does Romney support a budget that takes 62 percent of its spending cuts from programs that help the poor? How would Obama protect the poor from spending cuts in any “grand bargain” deficit deal he might sign?

The poor need JOBS more than they need "programs".

[phins_4_ever]

The poor need JOBS more than they need "programs".

Yeah, but those jobs were either outsourced by Romney and Co or killed by Bush and Co.

[Tetragrammaton]

Something no one wants to hear: we are likely to see a new normal in unemployment numbers, trending upwards. More and more low wage jobs are going to disappear even as the economy recovers. Retail stores are going to keep closing because of the increasing power of online shopping, which doesn't employ nearly as many people. The astronomical increases in upper-class wages will only increase the divide. Six dollar a gallon gasoline won't help, either. We are likely to see a European-Japanese style of high single digit unemployment for long periods of time. Like it or not, welfare programs will have to increase, and morally, the rich who helped lead to this situation should pay more to fund it.

[TrojanFin]

Something no one wants to hear: we are likely to see a new normal in unemployment numbers, trending upwards. More and more low wage jobs are going to disappear even as the economy recovers. Retail stores are going to keep closing because of the increasing power of online shopping, which doesn't employ nearly as many people. The astronomical increases in upper-class wages will only increase the divide. Six dollar a gallon gasoline won't help, either. We are likely to see a European-Japanese style of high single digit unemployment for long periods of time. Like it or not, welfare programs will have to increase, and morally, the rich who helped lead to this situation should pay more to fund it.

This is definitely the reality if Obama gets re-elected. I am hoping a change in leadership will curtail some of the bleeding.

[Tetragrammaton]

This is definitely the reality if Obama gets re-elected. I am hoping a change in leadership will curtail some of the bleeding.

It will be the same regardless. We live in a capitalist economy.

[Eshlemon]

Something no one wants to hear: we are likely to see a new normal in unemployment numbers, trending upwards. More and more low wage jobs are going to disappear even as the economy recovers. Retail stores are going to keep closing because of the increasing power of online shopping, which doesn't employ nearly as many people. The astronomical increases in upper-class wages will only increase the divide. Six dollar a gallon gasoline won't help, either. We are likely to see a European-Japanese style of high single digit unemployment for long periods of time. Like it or not, welfare programs will have to increase, and morally, the rich who helped lead to this situation should pay more to fund it.

Was that a typo? The trend is the reverse.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Obama 'Good-Paying' Jobs Claim At Odds With His Record

President Barack Obama made a strong case during Tuesday night's debate for how his administration would create "not just jobs," but "good-paying jobs." Obama said the jobs would be founded on the advanced manufacturing projects and education initiatives he would enact in a second term.

But Obama's record on high-paying jobs leaves much to be desired.

A recent study from the National Employment Law Project revealed that about 60 percent of the jobs created since the start of the Great Recession in 2008 were low-wage jobs. By comparison, most of the jobs lost during the same period were middle-wage jobs, the kind Obama was likely referring to when he spoke of "good-paying jobs

."

[Tetragrammaton]

Was that a typo? The trend is the reverse.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


."

There are still many types of traditional low-wage jobs that are going to disappear, mostly in the retail/service industry.

[phins_4_ever]

There are still many types of traditional low-wage jobs that are going to disappear, mostly in the retail/service industry.

I think the low wage jobs will continue to increase especially if the flow of job outsourcing is not stopped. The reason why companies send jobs overseas is not to pay less on low wages but to pay less on manufacturing jobs which usually compromises the middle class. Those kicked out of the job forcew will be forced to start selling the stuff they used to build but now being done overseas.

If Romney is elected President you can see a wipe out of the middle class in 4 years.

[RockyMtnPhinfan]

How about raising taxes on the middle class. Romney said last night he's going to cut taxes for the rich AND for the middle class. Then Obama went on to deconstruct that entire possibility as complete nonsene and did it in convincing fashion. Romney plain lies about his intentions and when he gets called to the carpet he has no answer. Romney once again was vague and did not, ONCE AGAIN, give any specifics on his tax plan. He's full of himself and the uppercrust of society. I can't vote for someone like Mitt Romney who thinks their **** doesn't stink and is pro life.

---------- Post added at 07:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:52 AM ----------

Something no one wants to hear: we are likely to see a new normal in unemployment numbers, trending upwards. More and more low wage jobs are going to disappear even as the economy recovers. Retail stores are going to keep closing because of the increasing power of online shopping, which doesn't employ nearly as many people. The astronomical increases in upper-class wages will only increase the divide. Six dollar a gallon gasoline won't help, either. We are likely to see a European-Japanese style of high single digit unemployment for long periods of time. Like it or not, welfare programs will have to increase, and morally, the rich who helped lead to this situation should pay more to fund it.

^^^^^^^This