Obama at Chattanooga’s Amazon center challenges GOP to accept corporate tax deal

[alp227]

Source: Chattanooga Times-Free Press

Speaking in Chattanooga, President Barack Obama laid out a “grand bargain” in which he challenged congressional Republicans to go along with a deal to cut corporate tax rates in exchange for more spending in areas he says are key to generating solid middle class jobs.

“We’re not lacking for ideas,” Obama told an audience of some 2,000 people at Amazon’s giant distribution center. “We’re just lacking action, especially out of Washington. For most of the past two years Washington has just taken its eye off the ball when it comes to the middle class.”

He said “the good news is there’s a growing number of Republican senators who are trying to work with Democrats to get something done,” but spent time

But U.S. House Republicans aren’t buying it with GOP Speaker John Boehner earlier today saying Republicans have their own plan and noting Obama had said it wasn’t going to change anyone’s mind.

Read more: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2013/jul/30/obama-chattanoogas-amazon-center-challenges-gop-ac/

---

Video:

Transcript

Oh, Clay Bennett toons!

The Tennessean in Nashville also reported on the speech: Obama pitches a new 'grand bargain' on jobs in Chattanooga

[AndyA]

1. Note to President Obama

Corporations are doing very well right now. They don't need tax cuts. Tax cuts don't guarantee they will create jobs, as we saw during the pResidency of the second Bush. Many corporations pay effectively ZERO taxes, so what are you going to cut? Are the American people going to subsidize more corporations, so they can earn more money and not hire anyone?

Perhaps you should take a better look at America, President Obama. With the current minimum wage, a person CANNOT live. Even working full time. Even if they live in the least expensive county in the country--they do not make a living wage. What do you propose to do about that?

Economics seems to indicate to me that if average working Americans had more money to spend, they would spend it, creating more demand for products and services. This would stimulate employment growth so others would have jobs, and the economy would grow. Not crawl--barely--in a positive direction as it has been.

You want to do something to help the MAJORITY of Americans? You know, the people who voted TWICE to put you in office? Raise the minimum wage. Put a stop to corporate welfare and end incentives for American companies to offshore jobs. You insist on giving away more to corporations? Fine. Give them tax cuts for creating jobs here in America. Give them more for bringing jobs to America from other countries.

Increase social security benefits for seniors. SS hasn't kept up with the true cost of living in a long time, seniors will spend every bit of it which will stimulate the economy and create jobs.

You might say this is impossible, that the GOP will never go along with it. Why not take your case before the American people, which will put pressure on the GOP. It will never happen if you don't try it, and so far you haven't tried it.

[cstanleytech]

4. Good points and I agree

with you a great deal but the problem is how do you calculate what a *living* wage is exactly when the cost of living varies depending on what part of the country you are in?
Also how do you get the companies to pay such a wage?
The only way I can really see such a thing occurring would be to link the taxes a company is charged to the gap in wages from its lowest paid to its highest with the bigger the gap the larger % the company is taxed and the lower the gap the lower the tax.
Least that way they will not be as inclined to raise prices making any hike in wages for the average worker moot .

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Economists have all sorts of models for calculating

cost of living & "living wages." Even if you ignore the regional variations in the data, just using things like the national poverty line definitions will get you a long way toward a more equitable distribution.

If you really want to match local data, you let local communities set a living wage level that is at or above the national average depending on local conditions.

The way you get companies to pay that wage is by demanding it.

[delrem]

5. A brilliant synopsis.

[maui902]

6. Just for the record

The article you cited mentioned that the President's proposal mentioned most of what you cited in paragraph 4 of your post: raise the minimum wage; greater incentives for companies that create jobs here in the US; and cutting incentives and loopholes for multinational corporations in order to raise (as opposed to lower) tax revenue to be used for job creation programs such as infrastructure spending and continued investments in alternative energy. Seems like a relatively progressive proposal to me. Lowering tax rates does not always mean lower tax revenue; and I'm not referring to the conservative belief that lower taxes lead to higher revenue. Instead, I am referring to the notion that the President is suggesting we lower corporate tax rates but only if we get rid of the loopholes that effectively lower the rate below what he is proposing as the new rate, at least for a number of US based multinational that currently evade all off a portion of the corporate tax they would otherwise pay, which is something we should all support.

[JoePhilly]

10. Folks tend to not understand, or intentionaly ignore, the point you made.

[7962]

13. It should be simple, but they refuse to make it so;

Do away with ALL the corporate deductions,drop the tax rate to 10%. That way EVERY corp would pay. No more hiring a dozen big time lawyers to get you to a zero rate. We would also no longer have the highest corp tax rate in the world. WHile its true that few PAY that rate, foreign companies look at that as a starting point. We are also the only country that allows foreign income to be taxed twice. Even France doesnt do it. Thats why a couple trillion stays overseas.
This WOULD raise revenue because MORE corps would actually be paying taxes that are not paying anything, or very little, now.

[Sunlei]

12. It's been on the table to raise the FED min. to $9 an hour.

When that happens all states have to match that with their minimum wage.

Raise the Federal minimum wage is one of the many policies to help the middle class republicans have obstructed for years.

[AndyA]

14. Raising the minimum wage to a level that is still less than a living wage

Depending on the source, most feel the minimum wage would need to be around $14-16 in order for people to truly be able to survive on minimum wage.

[Sunlei]

15. The states can give a higher minimum if they care to. They have to at least match

the Federal minimum. Up to Congress to stop obstructing the Federal raise. It's been on the table for years.

[Babel_17]

23. "It will never happen if you don't try it"

More people vote Democratic than not so I'd say it's worth a shot.

Make them disparage these popular, Democratic, ideas. Make them remind their low information voters of what they stand for.

[phleshdef]

27. Note to you, his plan would result in corporations paying more taxes.

Why is everyone glossing over the math here?

Corporations aren't paying 32% or 28% in taxes, for the most part. They are paying much less than that because of all the loopholes that allows them to legally evade. The President's proposal, which he has presented more than a few times over the past couple of years, would lower the rate to 28% but close most of those gaps, resulting in corporations paying more in taxes than they've paid in ages.

[AndyA]

28. I'll believe that when I see it

Obama is nothing if he's not flexible. We'll see what the end result is--he'll probably cave to the GOP (AGAIN!) and lower the tax rate for corporations while allowing more loopholes.

And he'll label it as a success!

Check back with me when all is said and done, if anything comes of it at all.

[DRoseDARs]

2. "I dare you to come up with a shittier Grand Bargain than mine." ... *twitch, twitch*

ELEVENTY-BILLION DIMENSIONAL CHESS!!1



Jesus.

[onehandle]

3. Robert Reich: 'While Amazon adds 5,000 warehouse jobs it destroys 50,000 retail jobs.'

'Progress on jobs front? While Amazon adds 5,000 warehouse jobs it destroys 50,000 retail jobs.'

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/362010641613066243

He's talking about the Walmart effect. Amazon is the new Walmart.

Walmart has been killing small businesses for decades, by consolidating shopping and low paying jobs in one big building.

Amazon is finishing the job of killing locally owned businesses.


Amazon spent almost three million dollars lobbying Congress last year. Boehner's teabagger Congress.

[Sunlei]

16. Local zoning and neighborhood associations laws restrict home self employment.

city laws too. It's the local restrictions on self employment that restrict a lot of people to having to accept those 'jobs' or have nothing except drug dealer 'jobs'.

Local laws are the most restrictive of personal freedoms.

[freshwest]

7. A Plan to Simplify the Tax Code for Businesses and Give Working Families a Better Deal

“...But if we’re going to give businesses a better deal, then we're also going to have to give workers a better deal, too,” President Obama said.

I want to use some of the money that we save by closing these loopholes to create more good construction jobs with infrastructure initiatives that I already talked about. We can build a broader network of high-tech manufacturing hubs that leaders from both parties can support. We can help our community colleges arm our workers with the skills that a global economy demands. All these things would benefit the middle class right now and benefit our economy in the years to come.

"And that's what I'm going to be focused on not just for the next few months," he said. "I'm going to be focused for every one of the 1,270 days I've got left in my presidency on how to make sure that we've got more opportunity and more security for everybody who is willing to work hard in this country. That's where I believe America needs to go."

Learn more about President Obama's plan to simplify the tax code for businesses and create jobs and economic growth:

FACT SHEET: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class: Jobs

One of the cornerstones of the President’s plan to create a better bargain for the middle class is to ensure that every American who is willing to work for it will have the opportunity for a good job that pays good wages. In today’s speech, the President laid out an idea that both parties should be able to support to create jobs: a plan that simplifies the tax code for our businesses and gives working families a better deal.

Our current tax code is broken and too complex, with businesses that play by the rules paying a 35% tax rate while many corporations that can hire hundreds of lawyers pay virtually no taxes at all. That is why the President has called for a revenue-neutral simplification of our business tax code to eliminate loopholes that encourage companies to ship jobs overseas and establishes a top tax rate of 28%. Under the President’s proposal, some businesses would pay less, some corporations would pay more, but everyone would pay their fair share. But if we’re going to give businesses a better deal, we should give the people who work there a better deal too. Today, the President is calling for a pro-growth tax reform and jobs package that would be fully offset using one-time revenues raised as we transition to a new business tax system. The transition revenue would support much-needed investments such as modernizing our infrastructure; creating new manufacturing hubs; and training our workers with the skills they need for the jobs of today and tomorrow. At the same time, President Obama remains committed to pursuing a long-term deficit reduction deal that includes revenue-raising individual tax reform and a balanced approach to replacing the damaging sequester.

The bottom line is that the President will work with Republicans on a package to simplify our business tax code so long as it includes real investments to help restore middle class security, create jobs and grow the economy.

Much more here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/07/30/fact-sheet-better-bargain-middle-class-jobs

The primary source here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/07/30/plan-simplify-tax-code-businesses-and-give-working-families-better-deal

Naturally, the 1% owned media will do all they can to obfuscate, block and edit this event to depress the Democratic voting.

They will be twisting his plan because it will curtail their profits by eliminating the loopholes that grow their monopoly power.

Thanks alp227, for posting the video and so much more on this event. XP'd.

[seabeckind]

30. Even those it's nitpicky...

I don't care for this statement: "We can help our community colleges arm our workers with the skills that a global economy demands."

It, like so many other implicit meanings, seems to place the onus for the lack of fit on the workers rather than identifying the problem as a lack of opportunity.

Given the availability of jobs I have found that people will go out of their way to learn new skills, learn new jobs, rise to opportunity.

It is only when there is no opportunities and no path for advancement that they atrophy.

And I REALLY didn't like this statement: "everybody who is willing to work hard in this country"

[freshwest]

32. I support community colleges or OTJ training as all people are not going to get into universities.

And I don't know anyone who doesn't consider themselves to be hard working, no matter what job they have. It didn't offend the people he was speaking to there. I'm not sure what you mean when you say 'the onus' being placed on the worker. Who should the onus be placed upon?

As far as the global remark, it's no use to deny reality. Other nations are educating their youth and guaranteeing healthcare, good wages and they will be taking our jobs away. That's what we have to have here. They know it and Obama knows it.

Educated people from all over the planet live in my area and are taking the jobs at the same rate of pay as American born workers. They are being treated as equals.

Place of origin no longer guarantees being well off. People want equality and that is what it is. It doesn't have to preclude or deny opportunities, or reduce a standard of living.

Getting an education is highly prized in most countries. Where it is not, the results are predictable. There are many levels of education, some on the job and some in school.

Obama has pushed for a wider range of work and more products made in the USA, which is that opportunity you speak of. As far as opportunity goes, I was just discussing this with someone last night who was worried about her son's job as a military contractor. He is being paid more than highly educated professionals in my area, because of the luck of the draw, as an American citizen, he signed up for duty, then went to work for private contractors. He has been making over $10K a month for essentially being a warehouse foreman, not saving the world or brain surgery.

She brought up how in Europe they educate all their citizens to college for free, and I talked to her about people I know who explain that paying taxes is not a huge burden for my friends, as they get back more than they put in with equal treatment and being educated and having opportunites to live at good wages.

But I also said we have trouble transitioning to that in this nation, since the anti-tax crowd took over things, they are the take the money and run crowd, like Romney. They stole opportunity by ruining us with that business model. That is what needs to change, and that is what Obama addressed there, if you noticed that part.

Because some of getting away with the loopholes and denying opportunity to get jobs of any kind in some areas by stealing our productive capacity. We will be dealing with the impact of a Reaganesque way of doing business for a long time in this nation.

My friend and I agreed that whatever we learn cannot be taken away from us by these Romney type employers. The most successful folks I know have gone into fields that cannot be outsourced, physical therapy and other things that are specific to local human needs. We talked about this new way of making a living as compared to what we had in the past, if we worked hard for a company we would have a job.

My family like others has gone through the trauma of having to move for work and tried to escape the problem of their income being determined by businessmen. So they went into business for themselves, some of them and it's a hard life.

Locally owned business don't move like the big firms that shift their work force around or shut down towns. So those are some solutions to very unhappy people.

As far as taking offense, I would not take offense because I worked hard, and consider his words an acknowledgement of that, as did my friend. That speech said to us that we should be able to provide for ourselves and our families.

If possible, one must pick one's education in line with what is going on and a long view. Some people are not thinking this all the way out, and have been snuckered into learning things that there was no market for when they learned them. We were both unable to finish our educations despite some opportunities.

I don't begrudge anyone that did, anymore than I begrudge any other person what they managed to obtain through hard work. But don't pull the ladder up behind oneself, is what I say.

Thanks for your reply.

[seabeckind]

33. I'm sorry we're talking across each other.

Long ago when I graduated high school there were many job opportunities...if you were inclined to labor (skilled) there were mills, foundries, factories, etc. Unskilled could get you in some construction jobs, etc. And in each of these cases there were career paths to move you out of those positions within companies.

If you were academically inclined there were colleges and trade schools.

Starting jobs were just that -- starting. You invest 30 years of your life with the same company and the company would invest in you.

Then the outsourcing hit during the Reagan years. The corps shed the pensions and any sense of an obligation to their employees. All that mattered was the bottom line and being able to dictate working conditions.

And then when the jobs were gone our "leaders" said we needed to learn to function in the 21st century service environment. Like it was our fault we didn't learn Excel or some business math. And that if we did that we'd be on Rock Candy Mtn.

Bullshit.

I knew a few people who didn't work hard. Dam few.

I knew a few people who weren't proud to learn their job and others also. Dam few.

I refuse to accept that it's anyone's fault but some beancounter sitting in an office on the top floors for the loss of American jobs.

And I refuse to accept the fact that our education system is failing because we don't emphasize education enough. For what we spend? Bullshit. Our education system is failing cause somebody values the profit to be made from it rather than the investment in our people.

</rant>

[freshwest]

34. We don't disagree on the facts. Just the ideas about how to get things better.

I grew up in the exact same environment you describe, and watched it be undone under Reagan.

In excruciating detail, I saw it all unfold. I was unable to prevail among my fellow union members to not get caught up in the slick promotion of the Reagan campaign. There were underlying issues for my coworkers, most of whom voted for RR, citing other reasons that had nothing to do with the economy. We'd come from decades of being to tell an employer 'to take this job and shove it' if we felt were being abused.

First among those issues for my coworkers were Affirmative Action and all that it entailed. They did not want blacks, gays or women working alongside them, thoug they brought the standards down. They thought their vote for RR would be reinforce their percieved rights, but without any consequence to themselves as well. His first act to go after PATCO was the beginning of the end for our union, too. But who did they blame?

The Democrats and Carter, and they've never stopped voting that way. They turned their back on the system that brought them their prosperity, they had decided to pull the ladder up behind them. It does not work that way.

Gotta go, have things to do.

[AgingAmerican]

8. The past is prologue

nt

[bearssoapbox]

9. Yes Mr. President. Extend the hand of bipartisanship.

And just like all the other times you will pull back a stump.

You can't reason with rabid dogs.

Then you will give in to their demands.

Quite possibly before they make any.

In the end the disabled(like myself), the poor(present), the elderly(pretty close,58) and the children, will take yet another hit and we will have to cut back some more on food, gas, insurance, clothes, everything else , so the rich and corporations won't have their bank accounts, or their feelings hurt.

We need more than a momentary flash of spine when he deals with the rat bastards that is the Grand Obstructionist Party since they would rather see the country and/or the world go to hell rather than agree with the President on anything.

Why can't he see that? He seems to be a pretty smart guy. I really like him and am glad that I voted for him but.....

Of course some help from more of the dems in Washington would be a great help also. Not just a 'very' few.

[JoePhilly]

11. So what should he do?

Nothing?

[Sunlei]

17. Pres. O should ask to raise the Federal Minimum to $20 an hour to make the $9

on the table look better.

[JoePhilly]

18. Why not go to $50 so $9 look like a real bargin?

[Sunlei]

19. or just say he doesn't want to raise the Fed and Rs will raise it to spite him.

[JoePhilly]

20. See, now you're thinking.

[Sunlei]

21. yes, but the $9 federal minimum O. policy has been on the table for 2 years.

R congress won't even do that for citizens who have to live in states that will not raise the STATE minimum wage.

[Babel_17]

22. /. has links to the story

I think the President's staff could have picked a better site for his speech. I'm happy he's talking jobs but the optics of this are not good.

http://politics.slashdot.org/story/13/07/31/125234/obama-praises-amazon-at-one-of-its-controversial-warehouses

The President has done a good job on the economy given what he was handed and that the Republicans have been idly sitting back while warming their hands on the embers of the economic destruction that their party is mostly responsible for creating.

Well, this story isn't of any lasting import. I look forward to the President getting out there and talking jobs. That always makes the Republicans look weak because they have to preface speaking of their enthusiasm for jobs by plugging tax breaks for the 1%.

Keep the message pure and take it to them, is my advice for the President.

[madrchsod]

31. ironic is`t it...

people died last year working in one of amazons sweat shops. temp workers with no insurance or for that matter no rights at all. sometime i wonder who ever set this up knows what goes on outside of washington dc.

[obama2terms]

24. I hope Obama tries to raise the minimum wage

Even a buddy of mine who typically votes republican admitted that if we wanted to see wages go up, we have to rely on Obama and not so much these cooks in congress who would vote down a bill to end world hunger if they thought the president approved of it.

[Jesus Malverde]

25. Strange talking about corporate tax when AMAZON

Has an 8% edge over local stores with a retail presence since they don't pay state taxes in most states.

[seabeckind]

29. Trickledown by any other name...

Maybe the gop will do the right thing. Even if it's for the wrong reason.

We've been giving the corporations the carrot for way too long. Time for the stick.

On edit: For a short time during the depression recovery there was a surtax on businesses that didn't invest in America. Maybe we ought to keep the rates the same and close the loopholes anyway? Start (and end) with that position.

Obama may not be able to do anything about the rates and loopholes but he can audit the poop out of them. Not going to hold my breath.