Steve Driehaus Democratic candidate for Congress
This is really late in coming but this week has been crazy with the Everyones Famous! Blogger Bash. Last weekend Steve Driehaus Democratic candidate for the Ohio First Congressional District seat got together with local bloggers. I didn’t know anything about him going in, but I liked how candid he was over issues and questions that were raised. My concerns centered on the fact that all Chabot seemed to care about was his Westside suburban base, he seems to cater to them exclusively. Driehaus hedged just a little but said he definitely supported public transport including the streetcar and would support Cincinnati as a whole not just one part of it. I came away impressed.
Now the bad part, I had to hold back and stay open minded when he started blaming the housing crisis on the Republicans and talked about how they hate government. I think he’s wrong, they hate big government but they don’t hate America and what I love about it, like say the way that Obama does (he brought Obama up repeatedly, so in my mind its fair game). And correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the easy credit start in the late 90’s?
But that was the only problem I had with Steve Driehaus, depending on what happens in the run up to the election I may vote for him. I haven’t heard much from Chabot and since he's against the Banks and streetcar that may seal the deal for me.
Now since I’m on the subject of Obama and big government, I need someone to explain basic economics to me. I “only” went to a state college, YSU and “only” got a B. I don’t have Obama’s fancy Harvard education to fall back on. This is what I don’t get, Obama wants to tax “big” business, whatever they are, effectively adding cost to their process and making it harder for them to turn profits and hire more people, punish them for being successful. Then he wants to take that money and hand it out to people who need it, he hasn’t defined the need part yet, effectively rewarding them and enabling their need.
So, does that sum it up? That’s what I took away from my B in state school economics.
[where: 45202]
comments?
I won't go into full details, but essentially Obama is proposing to no longer continue the tax breaks for the upper class that were put into effect by the Bush administration. Most everyone will see their tax rates return to levels seen in the 90's (upper class) or see them reduced (middle class).
ReplyDeleteIt's a theoretical difference in economics. Republicans are still subscribing to the trickle down economics that Reagan made so popular and executed so successfully. That's all well and good, but globalization wasn't what it is today back then...the game has changed.
The real key here is the tax rates on small businesses. A tax break for a small business could improve their bottom line by 50%, while only maybe 5% for the big businesses. That is a key difference and in the end will have a larger impact on job creation as small businesses are in constant need to grow themselves.
My stance is that trickle-down economics are a thing of the past. So when we offer tax breaks to big businesses they still create jobs...they just create them in places where the labor force is cheap (i.e. India, China, etc). If there was some way to ensure that these jobs were staying in our own country then I would be fully supportive of those kinds of economic policies, but that's just not how things work.
So in a nutshell I believe that by continuing to follow the trickle-down economic policies we are really just paying for job growth oversees...especially with the rapidly expanding free trade agreements (which aren't necessarily a bad thing). We need to offer tax incentives to those companies creating jobs here within our own country to get the best bang for our buck. It could be a big or small business, but from my view you will see a greater and more reliable return from the small businesses...not the big ones.
I read a very good article in the New Your Times exploring Obama's economics:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp&adxnnlx=1219334715-%20hXyLHhXRuU73ehdEOijqA&oref=slogin
You'll need to login to see it, but you can sign up for a free account. It is very long, but worth the read imho.
I would diverge from UncleRando's narrative a wee bit. I agree somewhat with the article that Reagan's policies succeeded because the tax structure was so out of whack. And it makes a good case that W's tax cuts went too far. So Obama isn't looking to go back to Carter's time, but Reagans, at least according to this article...
Since there is about a 99% chance that the Democrats will hold the house of representatives, the general theme legislation the house will be passing will not change if you have Chabot or Driehaus.
ReplyDeleteWhat might change depending on Chabot or Driehaus is support for local projects.
I will have to look more into the biz tax side of both candidates, don't know enough about Chabot vs Driehaus yet either. Here is a chart to help understand the personal tax side.
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/5ly4uk
Here is another good chart on Buzzfeed,
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/477jm6
note this is how much each would save the average American, I would have liked to see another one done the same way showing cost.