Bring Jobs Home Act

[Guest]

The Bring Jobs Home Act is being opposed by Republicans. Why? It is thought to be useful to unions, that is why. Read the bill summary and tell me if it is a good idea or not and why.

Bring Jobs Home Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to:
(1) grant business taxpayers a tax credit for up to 20% of insourcing expenses incurred for eliminating a business located outside the United States and relocating it within the United States, and
(2) deny a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses incurred in relocating a U.S. business outside the United States. Requires an increase in the taxpayer's employment of full-time employees in the United States in order to claim the tax credit for insourcing expenses.

[Guest]

Republicans by nature and idealogy would not tun down this act unless there is something Democrats are not telling people about this Act. I know what the other side of ther argument is but i refuse to play "Is So, "Is Not with people' It would seem to me voters would have finally caught on to this nonsense being foisted on them by both parties. However politicians have come to understand that maany voters don't read beyond the titled heading of any article pretty much like reading a bumper sticker to do otherwise is just too time consuming:exceptions on this forum are blueash,VK btk, richielion, CMANN, Bucco Sally jo, old coach, DLP, ijustluvit, and a few others whose usernames I cannot properly construct

[Guest]

If President Obama is for it, republicans will be against it even if it was their idea in the first place.

[Guest]

I cannot find any fault with this Act. I googled it and found only supporting articles and not one that criticized it.

What are the downsides to it?

[Guest]

If President Obama is for it, republicans will be against it even if it was their idea in the first place.

You are so right on......and isn't that sad? Repubs are always talking about taking their country back....yeah right, back to the Dark Ages. :doh:

[Guest]

If President Obama is for it, republicans will be against it even if it was their idea in the first place.

The best and wiset manner to bring jobs back to American is found in the basic economic principle appropriately labeled "comparative advantage".. politicians on both sides of the aisle either are unaware and or conveniently ignore that principle. The Democrats are supporting this bill only because they want union votes.

It would appear that anytime a politicians does something of self interest which I am afraid to have to admit, I believe is most of time, must look at the bill with jaundice eyes because the odds are it isn't beneficial to the taxpayer/voter.

The liberal segment of the Democratic Party is leading its voters astray. Likewise, the Establishment of the Republucan Party is leading its voters astray. Mitt Romney is on a balance beam trying to appease the Establishment, Evangelical , Tea Party and Independents...and a difficulty balancing act it is. I believe Romney is a moderate Republican, I support that position because I believe it is needed to reunite this nation. Conversely I believe Obama's obssessive idealogy is so destructive that he is incapble of uniting this nation. it may be fun to portrya rich white guys as evil greedy two headed monsters but it is destructive becaue rich white guys or the rich in general creating the continue impetus for this country's economy.

"United we stand divided we fall" that is what will cross my mind when I enter the voting booth in November

I opine others can decide

[Guest]

if you did not read the article in my other thread about the real causes of outsourcing then you should read it:

What (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/whats-really-wrong-with-offshoring-2012-07-19?dist=beforebell)

Any bill that does not address the core issues that created the problem in the first place is nothing more than a band aid.

Unfortunately we are in an environment, the campaign season, where it seems all that is important is to be able to serve up a morsel that piques the interest of a given voting block. And worse, far too many so called bills, go no place and do nothing as intended.

No I have not read the bill. No I will not look for it. No I will not criticize what I have not read first hand. Yes, I remain skeptical to the myriad of political game playing for votes. The very poor congressional and Obama track record on bills materializing and accomplishing the advertized intent, earns the skepticism.

The above is not a partisan position...just an observation of the here and now never ending partisan point/counter point with no real analysis and rational conclusions. End result...not very productive.

btk

[Guest]

The best and wiset manner to bring jobs back to American is found in the basic economic principle appropriately labeled "comparative advantage".. politicians on both sides of the aisle either are unaware and or conveniently ignore that principle. The Democrats are supporting this bill only because they want union votes.

It would appear that anytime a politicians does something of self interest which I am afraid to have to admit, I believe is most of time, must look at the bill with jaundice eyes because the odds are it isn't beneficial to the taxpayer/voter.

The liberal segment of the Democratic Party is leading its voters astray. Likewise, the Establishment of the Republucan Party is leading its voters astray. Mitt Romney is on a balance beam trying to appease the Establishment, Evangelical , Tea Party and Independents...and a difficulty balancing act it is. I believe Romney is a moderate Republican, I support that position because I believe it is needed to reunite this nation. Conversely I believe Obama's obssessive idealogy is so destructive that he is incapble of uniting this nation. it may be fun to portrya rich white guys as evil greedy two headed monsters but it is destructive becaue rich white guys or the rich in general creating the continue impetus for this country's economy.

"United we stand divided we fall" that is what will cross my mind when I enter the voting booth in November

I opine others can decide

As I see it, Rubicon, you are against the Bring Jobs Home Act for two reasons. 1) It is pro-union and therefore the Democrats want it because it will give them more union support. 2) The odds are it is not beneficial to the taxpayers.

You do not give any rational viewpoints one way or another. The Act is to give tax breaks to companies who eliminate outsourcing and bring jobs back to the USA - and to eliminate tax breaks to companies who do not. That definitely sounds like a win-win for everyone interested in creating jobs by giving tax breaks as well as for eliminating tax breaks (reducing debt for the taxpayer) on companies who are not helping our economy by having jobs outsourced.

___________

BTK says the Bring Jobs Home Act would be only a band-aid. Well, a band-aid is better than nothing. He also says, "No I have not read the bill. No I will not look for it. No I will not criticize what I have not read first hand." Nothing open-minded here - Just Say No! :loco:

[Guest]

Bring Jobs Home Act (S. 3364) - GovTrack.us (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3364)

With the 2012 Presidential and Congressional elections approaching, it seems like that the "politics as usual" blocs of both parties are not going to let very much if anything get done until after the elections.

[Guest]

you stand corrected as usual....I did not just say no. You have taken the "no" out of context and made it into something I did not intend.

All you wind up doing is watering down anything credible you might have had to say. You are very consistent.

I look forward to an exchange one day when there is "NO" name calling, "NO" snipping, "NO" spinning or twisting of others statements and or intents or both.

btk

[Guest]

I cannot find any fault with this Act. I googled it and found only supporting articles and not one that criticized it.

What are the downsides to it?

There's got to be some problem with the funding of this that the Republicans don't like, or the tacking on of provisions that have nothing to do with the so called aim of the bill that's troubling the Republicans.

I haven't read it and I'm sure I would be snoozing before I got halfway through it. I'll wait for more info from reliable media. All I can find are left wing proponents of the bill so far posting articles.

On it's face it sounds good, but there's got to be a catch if Harry and Nancy like it.

[Guest]

Anything done or proposed by a setting administrator or president in this case up for reelection or review is to only benefit that person.

[Guest]

In the spirit of their nominee, Mitt Romney, GOP senators block the law ending tax credits for corporations that ship US jobs overseas.


‘Insourcing’ bill fails to advance in the Senate - 2chambers - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/insourcing-bill-fails-to-advance-in-the-senate/2012/07/19/gJQAJErDwW_blog.html?wprss=rss_2chambers)

[Guest]

BTK, if you did not "just say no", please give us your informed opinion. From what I read of your posting, it did just say NO.

RichieLion's informed opinion was basically that he had not read the proposed act but just because "Harry and Nancy" were in favor of it - he is not in favor of it.

Republican parrots are not the answer. Think for yourselves. What is it specifically in this proposed Act that you do not like? It sounds like a win-win for all parties concerned.

Well, how does Mitt Romney explain this one?

[Guest]

As I see it, Rubicon, you are against the Bring Jobs Home Act for two reasons. 1) It is pro-union and therefore the Democrats want it because it will give them more union support. 2) The odds are it is not beneficial to the taxpayers.

You do not give any rational viewpoints one way or another. The Act is to give tax breaks to companies who eliminate outsourcing and bring jobs back to the USA - and to eliminate tax breaks to companies who do not. That definitely sounds like a win-win for everyone interested in creating jobs by giving tax breaks as well as for eliminating tax breaks (reducing debt for the taxpayer) on companies who are not helping our economy by having jobs outsourced.

___________

BTK says the Bring Jobs Home Act would be only a band-aid. Well, a band-aid is better than nothing. He also says, "No I have not read the bill. No I will not look for it. No I will not criticize what I have not read first hand." Nothing open-minded here - Just Say No! :loco:

buggyone: You are a very smart guy so I am wondering why your above-referenced post did not include addressing "comparative advantage" GM Sles men told me when I was looking for a car and comparing their product with a Japanese product that they could not compete nor could they meet Japan's quality. Why do you suppose that is?

Its a global economy and the rules changed long ago but the Democrats and union leaders ignore that fact. They ignored that fact because their arrangement worked well unions kept getting great benefits and politicians votes. If American politicians, CEO's and unions really wanted to enter the market they would sit down and get real serious. Look at other American Companies that are not strapped by the 1950's union type concept and see how they are thriving

That is what my post was about. James Carville tells Democrats "its the economy again, stupid" However in reality "its the global economy again and again and again, stupid."

[Guest]

BTK, if you did not "just say no", please give us your informed opinion. From what I read of your posting, it did just say NO.

RichieLion's informed opinion was basically that he had not read the proposed act but just because "Harry and Nancy" were in favor of it - he is not in favor of it.

Republican parrots are not the answer. Think for yourselves. What is it specifically in this proposed Act that you do not like? It sounds like a win-win for all parties concerned.

Well, how does Mitt Romney explain this one?

I can't help thinking that you're just assuming this is a good bill by the mere title of it. Democrat's have a way of naming a disaster of a program with a sweet sounding name.

I've not seen any real meat of this bill. The far left, which includes the AFL-CIO and the Teamsters are hell bent for this bill. I'm a former union man, but that gives even me pause. I want to know what's the real deal here.

[Guest]

"Senate Democrats pushed another largely symbolic vote on Thursday, the latest election season attempt to gin up Senate votes that align with President Barack Obama’s reelection themes.

The real result of Thursday’s failed vote on an outsourcing bill called the Bring Jobs Home Act is that it gives an outlet for Democrats to continue to talk about whether Mitt Romney and Bain Capital outsourced American jobs overseas.

“We can find out whether or not the Republican senators support the Bain Capital investment strategy of exporting jobs overseas,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) before the vote. “That’ll be a matter of record this afternoon.”

The Democratic-controlled Senate has also tried to push other Obama ideas: the Buffett Rule, pay-equity bills and a student loan interest rate freeze. In all those instances, Obama used his presidential megaphone to rally public support.

The most recent instance of this coordination involved the Bring Jobs Home Act, which would allow certain businesses a 20 percent tax credit for costs related to bringing outsourced jobs back to the United States. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), would also end a tax deduction for companies that outsource jobs.

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the top Republican on the tax-writing Finance Committee, said the bill had an “utter lack of seriousness” and noted that current tax law had no actual provision that gave companies a deduction for outsourcing jobs.

“As sound bites go, the president’s reelection campaign and the Senate Democratic leadership have apparently decided that they can make some political hay with this PR proposal,” said Hatch. “But as substantive tax policy goes, this proposal is a joke.”

Read more: Democrats' outsourcing bill falls short - Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78738.html#ixzz216VYFOZN)


Read more: Democrats' outsourcing bill falls short - Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78738.html#ixzz216VOm8vm)

[Guest]

Pure, unadulterated tripe from the Dumpublicans once again. If a bill is brought forward, even though it looks good and says it will create jobs in America plus reduce the debt, the Dumpublicans say NO because it is some idea that Democrats like.

No wonder the Dumpublicans are in such a precarious place right now.

[Guest]

OK I will give my take on a bill that sort of just came from no where and is all of a sudden the answer to the farming out of jobs.

I do not believe any bill of substance just all of a sudden shows up like that....even if it was in process for days/weeks/months....when did anybody hear anything about it? Not until just recently....I really don't know. What I do know is any bill of substance gets a lot of press and dialogue long before it goes for any discussion or vote. Hence I am skeptical.

Secondly the link that I posted does a good job of describing the real root causes of jobs outsourcing. I have only seen one comment since posting the link in two different threads today. The causes in the article are why I called the bill in question a band aid. Until such time as the real causes that drive outsourcing are addressed not much will change.

The incentives to outsource far out weigh anything that can be attempted with just the proposed tax breaks. In the early 70's when GE in Appliance Park Louisville KY jobs were being evaluated how much they cost to get done in Appliance Park VS manufacturing in Mexico. Each time before any jobs were eliminated by outsourcing the proposal was reviewed from a tax implication and labor point of view.

The tax incentives at the time were miniscule compared to the labor savings, hence no contest. The jobs were reviewed with the union on the basis of here is what the same components would cost in Appliance Park as well as what the costs would be in Mexico. Our proposals never ever expected the unions to buy into the prices from Mexico. What we did propose was a reasonable reduction in labor costs. The unions said there was no way they were going to buy such a proposal.

Over a five year period I watched GE build three brand new plants in Mexico and reduce employment in Appliance Park by the thousands.
Appliance Park employment in the early 70s was around 21,000. Employment in the 80s and early 90s was less than 10,000.

Could there be that big a difference in costs? How about almost 20 to one? Union member sweepers were getting over $20 per hour including benefits. Average assembly line workers were getting $18-$30 per hour.

The Mexican government was providing incentives faster than could be calculated including almost paying for the new manufacturing facilities there. When new jobs were advertised there we had a minimum of 50 applicants for each job.

We went to the federal government in the USA to get incentives for new manufacturing facilities, methods and equipment. We were turned down. We went to the unions to get a reasonable lowering of hourly costs.

The end result was Appliance Park almost becoming a ghost town.

So from first hand experience I can tell you the tax bill being proposed will not even come close.

On a side note but related...the price of steel in those days. We were getting quotes from Japan for rolled steel at prices that were more than 50 % less than we could get from Pittsburgh. Once again we were in negotiations with the steel companies to get a reduction in pricing. They were not expected to match the Japanese prices...just a reasonable reduction in costs. They of course had to go back to their union bargaining units for support. They were turned down 100%. After 5 years almost 80% of all steel was coming from Japan. They had new much more efficient steel mills subsidized by the Japanese government. Pittsburgh had steel mills making the steel the same way they did in the 40s and 50s.

Until such time as the US government decides to help subsidize manufacturing in this country and unions take heed to what it takes to BE COMPETITIVE........nothing is going to change. A ginned up for electioneering purposes tax break will not come close to doing the job.

Once upon a time there used to be over 500 machine tool companies in the USA. From 1970 through the middle 1980s that number dropped to less than 200. All outsourced to newer manufacturing facilities all over the world. We were not COMPETITIVE.

The story was and continues to be repeated every day currently.

When Obama or no matter who is in the WH or congress decides to start investing in American manufacturing like it's competitors and their governments do around the world....there will be no resurgence of manufacturing. And without an new industrial revolution in manufacturing here in the USA there will be no returning to the glory days when we had it all.

Of the billions and trillions being squandered to finance institutions how much was ever designated to fix America's competitive short fall in manufacturing?

The above is a mere scratch of the surface of the depth of the problem with out sourcing.
And for the first hand experience of much of the above I do not think the current bill will make ANY impact of significance....other than political cannon fodder for the 2012 elections.

I hope the above gives you some insight into why I REMAIN a skeptic on this subject.

btk

[Guest]

Just more tripe from the Party of Nope.

[Guest]

Republicans by nature and idealogy would not tun down this act unless there is something Democrats are not telling people about this Act. I know what the other side of ther argument is but i refuse to play "Is So, "Is Not with people' It would seem to me voters would have finally caught on to this nonsense being foisted on them by both parties. However politicians have come to understand that maany voters don't read beyond the titled heading of any article pretty much like reading a bumper sticker to do otherwise is just too time consuming:exceptions on this forum are blueash,VK btk, richielion, CMANN, Bucco Sally jo, old coach, DLP, ijustluvit, and a few others whose usernames I cannot properly construct

I googled "SB3364 opponents say" to find opposing arguments on the bill. I don't have time to read it all right now, but here is a quote well worth looking further into, by Sen. Orrin Hatch:

"Under current law, companies can deduct the cost of moving people and equipment overseas from their taxes. S. 3364 would eliminate that deduction, and create a new 20 percent tax credit for all costs associated with moving overseas jobs back into the United States.

But Hatch said Democrats are being misleading by saying that there is a tax break for outsourcing.

“I’ll keep this book of tax codes at my desk here, if someone wants to show me the tax code that allows deductions for shipping jobs overseas,” Hatch said while holding the large book. “I’d like to see it, but it’s not in here.”

It’s unclear if the bill will clear the voting hurdle to end debate. Republicans were expected to support it until Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he was unlikely to include any Republican amendments."


Hatch calls Dems' 'insourcing' bill 'misleading' - The Hill's Floor Action (http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/238993-hatch-calls-dems-insourcing-bill-misleading)

I also wonder if there is other "stuff" packaged into this bill that has nothing to do with jobs. The lack of a line-item veto causes many good proposed measures to get thrown out with the bathwater containing "other stuff".

[Guest]

thanx for not disappointing me and achieving another new low. Your response is commensurate with one who has no idea what is being discussed....discussed is not the word because that IS NOT what you do. You have demonstrated time and again the inability to carry on a dialogue.

Your belittling positions on everything disgraces the party you pretend to represent.

I will no longer waste my time with your closed minded view on anything. I have read your last smart a$$ response.

[Guest]

Well, so far I'm reading some interesting analysis from the forums conservatives explaining how this bill is being described as misleading and lying about current law.

The liberals are saying nothing specific and having a snit fit.

I kind of knew that the way this would turn out.

[Guest]

question,will the federal and states be the first to bring home jobs that they have outsourced.

[Guest]

Just more tripe from the Party of Nope.

buggyone: For the third time "comparative advantage" Why do you stick your head in the sand here You want and I want jobs for Americans well continual heavy regulations by the governement accompanied with ridiculous taxes and corporations burden down with union monetary packages and union restrictions on productivity.

[Guest]

thanx for not disappointing me and achieving another new low. Your response is commensurate with one who has no idea what is being discussed....discussed is not the word because that IS NOT what you do. You have demonstrated time and again the inability to carry on a dialogue.

Your belittling positions on everything disgraces the party you pretend to represent.

I will no longer waste my time with your closed minded view on anything. I have read your last smart a$$ response.

Well, I just remember the axiom, "Millers grind the wheat, what is left is the grist."

[Guest]

[QUOTE]Repubs are always talking about taking their country back....yeah right, back to the Dark Ages.[/QUOTE

Boy is that the pot calling the kettle black. Redirection at it's finest.

[Guest]

[QUOTE]Repubs are always talking about taking their country back....yeah right, back to the Dark Ages.[/QUOTE

Boy is that the pot calling the kettle black. Redirection at it's finest.

A constant truism:

Whenever you want to know what the Leftists are up to, you only need to look at what they are accusing the Conservatives of doing. That is what they themselves are doing.