Right-Winger Owned in Economic Debate

[JDPriestly]

28. My advice to the businessmen who can't understand the regulations

or new laws like the ACA: Hire a lawyer to read it and then explain it to you. That's what lawyers do for a living. If your company is making what you say it is, you can afford to hire someone to advise you on the law. Some companies hire a person who deal with regulatory compliance. If you feel so worried, why don't you try that? The law is never all that certain, but then neither are the markets.

Or, if you can't afford a lawyer, go to your trade association or the Chamber of Commerce or some journal of the insurance industry.

If you are going to run a business, you have to be literate enough to at least read summaries of new laws. Everybody has to make an effort to understand what the law is.

Besides, much of the implementation of the ACA is, as I understand it, left up to the states. So businesses need to check publications that deal with the laws of the states in which they hire employees. That some states are taking their time deciding how to implement the law is not the fault of the Obama administration.

Congress passed the ACA. It was written as I understand it with the help of the insurance companies and to get the agreement of the Republicans. So this gentleman should air his grievances with the Republicans who could not accept a simpler plan.

This guy is just another member of the Party of No. Typical.

As for his economic arguments, they make no sense. They may make sense in his microeconomic calculations, that is the way he calculates his balance sheet, expenditures and income in his own company. But they do not work for the nation.

For example, we have to have food stamps. The alternative is to have starving children. There are enough hungry people in the US already. We have to feed the hungry.

As for Social Security being a Ponzi scheme. Not nearly as much as Wall Street. Ask anyone who is retired and is investing in secure investments in the stock market.

Again, as a nation, we have to provide for elderly people who can no longer work and who have been unable to save for retirement or have faced some catastrophe that has wiped out their savings. (Like maybe the 2008 bust-up on Wall Street which was caused by the lax regulatory enforcement of the Bush administration?)

Social Security is far better funded than our banks or AIG were in October 2008 and is solvent for the foreseeable future. Remember how two major Wall Street firms went bankrupt in 2008? This man has a short memory.

We need to focus on ending our trade deficit because that is the key both to returning good jobs and income to Americans of all income levels and to increasing tax revenues.