Why do democrats think that unemployment can't be fixed within 2 years?

Someone just asked why republicans think that unemployment should be lowered within 2 years. My question is, why do democrats think it CAN'T be lowered within 2 years? I understand government doesn't create jobs other than government jobs, but they sure can influence job creation. Reagan's model worked, and when I hear people say that his method of economic recovery added to the debt (even though we all know it was because Reagan had to compromise with Congress to get them to get on board with his plan and they weren't fiscally conservative) but let's say Reagan's plan was the reason for the increase to the national debt during his presidency - the bailouts and Obama's economic recovery does the same thing - it adds to the national debt, but doesn't even work. Why are democrats happy with Obama's economic "recovery" and telling republicans to be patient and that we shouldn't expect unemployment to go down within two years but Reagan was able to lower unemployment from 10.8% to 7.7% within 17 months because he lowered top marginal individual income tax rates from 70% to 28%, deregulated the energy and banking sectores, and cut deficit spending by 1.5%. This resulted in economic growth, which made businesses flourish, which resulted in a drop in unemployment. More people were working, people who were already working got paid more, which actually increased the income tax revenue to government!. When you couple this with small incremental tax increases, as Reagan did to prevent tax braket creep, the economy boomed, GDP went up, and the national average income went up. Why do democrats think that unemployment CAN'T be lowered within 2 years, when Reagan was clearly able to do what Obama can't?

Update:

Pfo, you obviously don't understand Reaganomics because we are doing the very opposite. Obama has increased regulation, hasn't lowered taxes (extending the Bush tax rates is not a cut), and used bailouts rather than private sector solutions. We are NOT using Reagan's model.

John P, I agree, paying people who don't work doesn't kick start the economy, which is what democrats are doing. Reagan DID fix unemployment, I take it you missed the part where unemployment went down and the average income and GDP went UP under Reagan? That means the economy flourished and the problem was fixed. My source for asking this question is here on Yahoo! Answers, Obama supporters ask all the time, clearly you don't spend as much time here as I do. They have been defending Obama and telling us we should be patient and that economic recovery "doesn't happen over night" and my point is the recession in the late 70s and early 80s is extremely comparable to the one we have now, but you have two polar opposite

Update 2:

Jim, I read your answer and although I agree with a few comments, overall I disagree with the sentiment that tax cuts don't have much of an affect and businesses are all greed. Although I am for free trade open market capitalism, I do agree that NAFTA has had a negative affect on it's proposed goal and therefore needs to be changed. I agree we need to do more here in America, industrially and educationally, but this starts with getting rid of the government and union relationship. The reason businesses put robots in their factories rather than workers is because robots don't complain and demand more from a business, and I imagine that true good businesses wouldn't mind paying their employees more and providing better benefits if they weren't taxed so much. High business tax rates does two things, it hurts the employee and it hurts the consumer, both negatively affects the economy. The employees lose benefits, pensions, and pay, while consumers get the trickle down increase in cost for

7 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    They don't think it can be fixed because they don't know how to fix it . They also realize that their outrageous spending sucks money from the economy and hinders the problem . The Democrats still want to spend and grow federal government at the expense of the American workforce .

    We need to stop putting the boot on the throat of businesses at let them remain competitive . We need to stop over regulating banks and let them choose who they want to loan to . Barney Frank and Chris Dodd put the nails in our economy with their lame ideas . A more simpler flat tax of 4-5 % with no deductions should be imposed on EVERYONE to pay most of the bills . A second tax bracket with deductions allowed to pay the rest of the bill .

    • Login to reply the answers
  • justa
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    Because there is no need to rehire people in the private sector when there is no demand and businesses have learned they can get more work out of less people by increasing the variety of work assigned to a position.

    Now the Republicans with their desire to cut government has decided to try and cut entire government bureaus. That will increase unemployment.

    So, logic tells you if we decrease government employment at the same time we face a decrease in the need for private sector employment those people will be on unemployment whereas before they were consumers, paying taxes, they will now be dependent on the government and revenues will be down and they will cut back on consumption, which will further reduce the needs of private business to hire more people than they need.

    Taxes may come into play later, but tax law don't always result in taxes paid. Robots might not make demands, but they won't buy product either. An interesting way for business to bite itself.

    There is too much interest in the bottom line and very little desire to simply make a decent profit, instead there is more of a desire to show absurd and unsustainable increases in profit.

    Most of the regulations and laws are written following, not in anticipation of some malfeasance or fraud, so they are reactionary. Business does the deed and when people say "that's awful, there ought to be a law'' that's when the law gets written.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Jim
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    >I read what you wrote. I want to respond in this manner. Unemployment is not a political issue. It is not a Republican OR Democratic issue. It is an economic issue and a business issue. Until corporations (and other business entities) decide to invest in American labor again, there won't be any real movement towards lowering unemployment. Sure, you can mess with tax incentives and let corporations and business use the environment and the infrastructure for free, without paying their fair share as a community citizen.

    When a corporation (as we have seen so often), plays one state off against another state, one city against another, one region against another, in building a factory or whatever, all we end up doing is giving them a free ride. They build a factory, fill it full of robots and computers, use our resources and infrastructure for free, and hire almost no one. If they built the same factory in China, they would hire 1000 people to work in it because they can get dirt cheap slave labor there...or Vietnam or wherever. I saw this happen over and over again here in Oregon, where large foreign electronics company's were given basically a free ride - no they didn't have to pay taxes, and NO they didn't hire hardly anybody and YES, they left the second they thought they couldn't make enough profit. Government is stupid (not Democrats or Republicans -just government) because they let this happen.

    It's not going to change for America until we stop treating each other like "enemies," or what I call "venimies" for venomous enemies. Until we stop being partisan, we aren't going to have any solutions - so its time to stop blaming because of poltical party and start working towards solutions which do NOT cater to corporate manipulation. But on a broader scene, it has to do with how we have encouraged business to leave America by giving them incentives to leave and take their business to foreign nations...as far as I am concerned, NAFTA and all the other trade agreements we have made over the last few years, are the REAL problem that has caused us to loose millions of high paying jobs. That is what we have to get rid of - these treaties we have signed.

    It doesn't matter what tax incentives you give business, they will always want more and more and more - because, profit is driven by greed and when business is run by greed and having no sense of loyalty to America or any other nation, you will never get them to work with us. Corporations you see, are like a privatley owned government. That is how they should be treated - entraprenureal dictatorships.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • JP
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    There's a difference between lowering the unemployment rate and fixing it. Also where is your source saying democrats believe this? Please don't say Fox News.

    EDIT:

    It seems like you're ranting about things I didn't say. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else. If the unemployement rate goes down 1% it was lowered. But there would still be a problem with unemployment. I am not debating Reagan's merits, I am simply stating that there is a difference between lowering unemployment and fixing it. I fully believe the unemployment rate will improve within the next 2 years. But fixed? Doubtful.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Lana
    Lv 4
    9 years ago

    I hardly think deregulating banking in our situation would do any good....People lost both houses and cars. You need cars to get to work, especially where I live. People also get taken advantage of in bad times (loan mods, anyone?). That makes it even harder to get back on track. There are a lot of things that need to be fixed, but the greed will never go away. Obama is only one person. He can't make everyone happy, and he can't fix eight years of screw ups by another person, who everyone so conveniently forgets, in only two years. The people need to help themselves too, by having some common sense and stop waiting for the government to come fix their boo boos.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Pfo
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    We are trying Reagan's model right now. Welcome to it. Times have changed, when Reagan was president, globalization and off-shoring were not as in full swing as they are now. Automation technology was not where it is today. The fact is, today's modern economy doesn't create jobs well, period. This is why unemployment won't be fixed within 2 years, no matter what is done.

    On the subject of unemployment, continually paying people who don't work isn't going to kickstart the economy either.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    350 million americans...

    presuming 1.5 children per househould?

    350 million / 3.5 = 100 million working age adults...

    9% unemployment means 9 million unemployed

    of which...

    8 million jobs were outsourced under republicans...

    if you honestly think that republicans will re acquire 8 million industrial jobs that took 8 years to leave..in only two years...they you're only fooling yourself...

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.