economy

Wait for the Fed bust to happen. Then the rich will become less rich and won't pay much of any taxes after writing off their losses.

Yes, lets talk about about this administrations "achievements".

Handpicked appointees on Obama's National Labor Relations Board stalled and tried to block Boeings building of the South Carolina Plant.

The result of union pressure no less.

Despite the heavy handed NLRB tactics, the plant was built and created 3000 + jobs, pouring millions into the local economy.

This Administration greased the speed of union elections, made decertification votes impossible, changed the requirement that a majority of workers vote for a union, and required almost every workplace in America to put posters up advising workers of their unionization rights.

The Obama Administration claimed to want to double exports and support free trade, but it took it nearly three years to send the pending trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea to Congress. Which means that in all that time American companies were  paying higher tariffs for exports.

By 2011 this Administration had proposed over 200 new rules affecting industry at a cost of over $100 million to comply.

Small businesses are especially overwhelmed and must hire lawyers to understand and comply with the massive amount of new regulations.

Add in the Frank-Dodd financial laws, coupled with the massive 3000 page "Health Care" language, costing business more costs to comply with, and you might get the picture.

Who's pouring millions into the democrats coffers to get them elected? Along with soros that is. Tell us jt.

Hey, don't talk negatively about Mitch McConnell.

He's a Colbert County boy--born in Sheffield at the predecessor hospital to Helen Keller.

And about the economy:   It sucks.  Would still have sucked less under a different president.  We need a Fair Tax and corporate tax reform to get all the cash back into the U.S.  

Also need to breakup those fat cat banks that are much too large and influential.  Not all of them are doing that well right now.  And regulations and armies of attorneys are required to fight the O'Bama administration.

I'm still surprised to see Huntsville to have so many incoming space related and U.S. Army jobs with Jeff Sessions speaking so much of the truth about the democrats.  You'd think O'Bama would be punishing this state for not supporting him.

Now, as to the $7 billion in oil subsidies. Those are the cost of doing business to find and produce the oil.

http://www.theatlantic.com/bus...as-subsidies/274121/

What crazed, mindless progressive thinks a company can keep in business if they can't deduct their expenses from their revenue.  Sure, tax their revenue, not their profits,  What better way to put the US oil companies out of business and enrich the arabs, 

As to Dodd-Frank, the act applies to all banks, not just the 10 or so "to big to fail" banks -- the one the Fed had to bail out.  The larger banks can afford the voluminous paperwork to meet the reporting required.  For small local and medium sized banks, meeting the requirements is a major financial hardship.  Progressives have a movement to use small and regional banks and credit unions and not the large banks..  But, in typical crony capitalism mode, enact laws to do just the opposite. 

As to government regulations, the Small Business Administration issued a report, pre-Obama that estimated federal regulations cost business about $1.75 trillion dollars.,  Since Obama, that's approaching $2 trillion.  With a $16 trillion economy, businesses must spend 1/8th of the GDP just to meet government federal regulations.

Separation of church and state -- yes!  Separation of economy and state -- hell, YES!

________________________________________________________

The NASA contracts are well beyond Obama's term.  He, nor congress have no power to end those contracts without paying the companies their expected profits.

The Army Materiel Command is the Army's Wal-Mart.,.  The army would have to close down without it.

_________________

The smart money contributes to both sides of the aisle.

But their fortunes have grown faster under Obama and the democratic senate than at any time since the 1920's.  Wall Street CEOs say new regulations are stifling them but bank profits and CEO pay have soared to record levels, 

--------------

No disagreements???

It seems that every poster wants them to have more.

___________________________________________________________________

Now, I will have posted on this for about 21 times. Progressives -- can't learn for experience, have little memory retention.  Now, I just cut and paste most of the reply.  No use writing something new for someone who can't retain the information. 

The wealth increase is in their investments.

The Wall St recovery is a bit of a Ponzi scheme instituted by the Fed.  Reducing interest rates to near zero discouraged savings in savings accounts, CDs, money market accounts and other traditional conservative investments -- forcing investors into the only game in town -- the stock market.  Stocks are well above book value -- always a warning sign.  When, the Fed raises the interest rates, stocks will fall in value -- like a popped balloon or a slow leaking tire is the question?  Far from just my opinion, most business and economic media report much the same.

One of the best indicators of how an economy is performing is the change in the GDP.  That reveals whether the economy is shrinking or growing.  Only if the GDP is growing will the economy improve.  For the last six years, the average GDP growth was 1.95 percent.  This is the worst recovery since and during the Depression.  The first quarter of 2015 is predicted to be low and will probably drive down the average even further.

JT mentioned the 1920s stock market -- in a way a good comparison.  In the 1920s, stocks were bid up on the hopes of rising prosperity.  One could put 10 percent down when buying stocks and borrow the rest.  The loans were supported by the stocks (at an inflated price) This kept growing until 1929 and the market crash.  The recession would have been short and nasty, as most were in the past.  However, President Hoover and congress passed a bill raising tariffs sky high -- the other nations followed suit shutting down world trade --The Great Depression ensued.  To convert a mess into a disaster takes the president and congress working in consort.

Cut and paste is my friend.for those with ADD.

Bank profits and CEO pay have soared to record levels. 

Dire, you reply and Best parrots your reply, "The wealth increase is in their investments"

Profits and pay is in investments??? 

Do you have to pay tax on the increase in investment worth?

While, there are a few CEOs that have pay packages in the millions, most make well below that.

"Salaries for Chief Executive Officers in the United States are generous, with average pay above six figures ($155K) per year. In the world of Chief Executive Officers, total cash compensation ranges from $72K on the lower end to $410K on the higher end; this includes bonuses that reach $131K and profit sharing that approaches $104K in rare cases, with some high rollers snagging commissions as high as $174K. Career length is the biggest factor affecting pay for this group, followed by geography. Medical benefits are awarded to most, and the larger part earn dental coverage"

http://www.payscale.com/resear...f_Executive_Officer_(CEO)/Salary

Dire, your link wouldn't work for me. Your numbers don't work either.

When Reagan came into office CEO pay was about 40 times the average pay. Let us figure.

$2.50 X 40 =$100 per hourX 2080= $208,000 per year in 1980

Now, by your post, average CEO pay is $155,000 per year. 

The numbers don't work.

__________________________________________________________

Try this:

http://www.payscale.com/resear...f_Executive_Officer_(CEO)/Salary

If still doesn't work, cut and paste this into search:  Salaries for Chief Executive Officers in the United States are generous, with average pay above six figures ($155K) per year

And, the source for your 40 times factor and $2.50 per hour as average pay is?

I see the first portion of the error in JT's computation.  He assumed an average salary of `$2.50 per hour.  As of 1981, the minimum wage was $3.35 an hour.  Of course, few people work at the minimum wage level (only about 4.5 percent now).  Therefore, the average wage in 1981 would be much higher.

OK, you got me. Now we'll refigure:

$3.35 X 40=$1.34 per hr. X 2080 hr per year= $278,720 per year for CEO's in 1981 if they got 40 times minimum wage. Now, your figures claim the average CEO pay is $155,000 per year now.

Your numbers on CEO pay won't compute. 

_______________________________________

You still missed the main factor -- forty times.  Suggest more research.

From Fortune 500 CEO pay web site:

1983, average CEO made 50 times average worker

2013, average CEO made 331 times the average worker.

Your figures: the average CEO makes $155K (that is $155,000) which from Fortune 500 is 331 times average pay. $155,000 divided by 331 = $468.28 per year. what did I miss? 

_____________________________________
Not my figures, but that of the website

Here is a better comparison with actual salaries of CEOs . As I stated, it really varies.

http://www.payscale.com/data-p...ceo-income/full-list

And, as one may see, Warren Buffet takes a small salary, but receives most of  his recompense otherwise

Just glancing at that chart,

3M CEO $4 million, average pay $73,700, ratio 57 to 1 That ain't bad

CVS CEO $12 million, average pay $28,700 The CEO is greedy.

I have never said that a good CEO is not worth a multimillion salary. The ones that runs a company into the ground and still gets a multimillion severance package don't deserve it.