The White House called. You have been offered a postion which

[jtuck004]

would be responsible for creating 500,000 jobs each month. Must be full-time, non-government.
Might take a few months, but we really need them, cause we are heading for 11-12% unemployment in 2011,
with a U-6 rate over 20%. Over half of all people in the workforce have been out of work more than 6 months,
most have no unemployment, state services are breaking down.

What policies would you put in place to make it happen?

[Common Sense Party]

1. So the government would be "creating" private sector jobs?

How would that work?

[lib2DaBone]

3. The government managed to send millions of "Private Sector" jobs to China..

..maybe they can figure out a way to get them back?

[Common Sense Party]

7. Huh? How?

First, how does a "job" get "sent" to China?

And how does the federal government do it?

[jtuck004]

16. I could take a shot at this - first we sign free trade agreements with

countries that keep their currency at a low price so they can make goods without overtly appearing to subsidize them, which would be against the terms of the contract.

We lower taxes on businesses and put policies in place that encourage short-term profits and lower salaries, then when the business moves their manufacturing to another country to take advantage of cheap labor and lax environmental rules we don't tax them for destroying the manufacturing base of our country.

We allow business to buy Congress and change\evade rules so that it is favorable to those who want to work towards short-term profits, to the disadvantage of millions of people in our own workforce. (For example - offshore wells may have been required to have a valve that would have prevented the Deepwater catastrophe, but it appears the last administration removed that restriction. Today we have people in congress trying to set a cap on their liability - but another way of looking at that is saying that the American people will be responsible for everything else, which could possibly be a hundred or a thousand times greater). Why are we giving Walmart tax breaks for locations when they are selling us cheap goods and undermining our workforce?

The feds may not be sending the jobs to China, but they are sure wrapping and mailing them.

[truedelphi]

17. Decent explanation, and uh, some companies put their work forces overseas

Due to the high cost of supporting benefit packages such as health care.

[fasttense]

19. Simply by offering tax incentives (really big ones) if a corporation

moves their factories and jobs to foreign countries. And by removing all tariffs on imported products.

[Wednesdays]

22. They put it in a shoebox, seal it up, and put postage on it?

:shrug:

[jtuck004]

8. No, but that's a good question. The private sector creates the jobs,

but are there government policies or programs which could assist them?

Government pays for accredited online training in, say, metalworking, accounting, engineering.
You access it from a computer. Maybe government labs where you can practice. College, even
junior college is out of reach of many people, yet we are now competing with China and
thousands of engineers who work there for, roughly, $800 a month. We can develop our
own but not if people have to go into debt for 20-50K.

Government agrees to a set amount of contracts for materials and goods made (manufactured and assembled) in U.S.A.
They do it with corn, could be done with tires. No tariffs, but a preference?

Policies like this have made Haliburton rich well beyond their wildest dreams. Maybe it could be done at a state level?

just brainstorming...I really think we are screwed beyond the point of no return, but maybe not.

[nevergiveup]

2. Declare all Tea Partiers terrorists

Take away their citizenship, Joe Lieberman style, and give their jobs to unemployed Americans who truly love their country.

[kelly1mm]

4. How many jobs do the 12-20 million illegal aliens in the US have?

Go after the employers with a systematic ICE audit of I-9's. In Arizona that freed up 300 or so jobs at a market chain with 1200 employees. 450 or so UNION janitorial jobs were freed up in San Francisco. Here are links:

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Hundreds-seek-to-fill-vacant-positions-at-Pros-Ranch-Market-91880224.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8293346

[jtuck004]

10. I should have said jobs that contribute to the wealth of the country.

They almost have to be manufacturing or mining, or creating new solutions like super-capacitors, replacements for oil and coal, things along that line.

Would service jobs such as those above, or jobs in health care, etc., do anything more than keep us busy while our economy slowly spirals down?

I am not sure that the whole "anti-immigration" mess isn't a smokescreen to keep us from making life uncomfortable for people in the gated communities anyway.

thanks

[kelly1mm]

21. I thought the OP was about helping getting the U-6 unemployment

numbers down. Granted, the majority of the jobs held my illegal immigrants are service jobs (as are the majority of all jobs in the US now) but freeing up those positions certainly would help in bringing down the U-6 numbers and bring relief to millions of US citizens/legal immigrants whose unemployment benefits may be ending soon.

[jtuck004]

23. It is, and you are correct. I just don't see the

undocumented worker issue as nearly the problem that many do. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time in the past working with them on golf courses and fence crews. Most of the so-called criminal behavior seems to stem more from the actions of those who wish to "prove" they are criminals than from their own behavior (if you were trying to stay "under the radar" would you be committing crimes?). Not that some don't, but I see much more from the U.S. citizens around them. The problem has been exacerbated by newspapers who would rather print and reprint stories far out of proportion to the problem. The only time they give up the space is when they can print 250 stories about a single "pit bull" bite, another overblown issue. Enforcement past a certain point not only begins to give a diminishing return but begins to make the rights people died for here meaningless. Once we go down that path, it may have irreversibly negative effects on our country's future.

But the real problem with service jobs, just as with the majority in health care, is that they depend largely on other people making a living good enough to have something left over. We have lost millions of those jobs so the gross that would have paid for these service jobs is simply no longer there. There has been money coming from the feds for some time (look at California's budget - a large part of it is federal spending on military and social security. Without that, they would be in a much, much deeper hole).

We need to focus on jobs and policies that will bring us out of this, or all it does is keep us busy till the next disaster or recession lowers our ability to live even further.

[sandnsea]

5. More money in health care & alternative energy

Oh yeah, Obama already did that.

We'll probably have around 8% unemployment next year, and with any kind of truly economic breakthrough in solar, be back at 4% within 3 years.

Quit fearmongering.

[jtuck004]

12. I'm really not trying to fearmonger ;) just brainstorming,

But just saying the jobs will be there doesn't say much.

There are 154,715,000 people in the workforce. 17.1% have been unemployed longer than 6 months.

That's 26,456,265 people, minus the 4% you say you are comfortable with, leaves a need for 25,398,014 jobs. In 36 months?

Sure, no problem - you will need to create 705,500 full-time jobs every month for the next 3 years.

For comparison,the chart below shows the average monthly job creation for the past few decades. See ANY months where we even got close to 700,000? This month was pretty good with 290, but you have to subtract 66K temp census workers. Next month or so will be larger increase in those, but they will be gone by August. Then what? States will have laid off a lot of people by then. And how many of these jobs that were created were really high paying jobs? Look at the numbers on the BLS site, and you may find that a lot of them were more likely 8, 10, 12 /hr. Single moms can't live on that, and even two adults are going to have trouble taking care of a family.


"Monthly Growth in Total Nonfarm Employment, Seasonally Adjusted: 1980-2008
Average Per Month Thousands.


Year
----
1980 22
1981 -4
1982 -177
1983 288
1984 323
1985 208
1986 158
1987 263
1988 270
1989 162
1990 26
1991 -71
1992 96
1993 233
1994 321
1995 179
1996 233
1997 280
1998 250
1999 264
2000 163
2001 -147
2002 -45
2003 7
2004 173
2005 211
2006 175
2007 91
2008 -256
2009 -373

[William Z. Foster]

6. can't be done

How can you work with the private sector on this? Their goal is to eliminate employees - that is called productivity and causes the stock to go up which attracts more capital - that is how you win that game, and if you don't play it you die. The goal of the government should be full employment. The money spent on Wall Street would have hired every unemployed and underemployed person in the country at $50,000 a year, and they could all go to work rebuilding the public infrastructure. That would revive the economy in a big hurry. Some would trickle up to the bankers and investors, and many new businesses would be started, so it is not as though the wealthy would be hurt. They do need to start paying their way, though, and that means massive tax increases on the wealthy few. That won't really hurt them either, though - if that is what people are worried about. They seem worried about something and therefore are unable or unwilling to think clearly about the challenge we face and to consider workable approaches to it.

That is - if we are serious about this. If we are not political conservatives or right wingers. If we are not mostly interested in defending and promoting the needs and whims and desires of the haves.

[jtuck004]

13. Yea, I kind of think along those lines. We have been playing the

short-term profit game for so long that it will be difficult, if not impossible (short of a complete breakdown) to work with existing businesses, for the very reason you state - their goal is to maximize profit.

But you do have two very good ideas there.

Raising taxes on the wealthy
Government policy of full-employment, or at least nearly full, employment.

And you are right, it's about time we tried a little trickle-up, and if it doesn't, well, shoot, we could feel awfully bad for them.

At some point we just have to say we don't care about all the obstructions and this is the way it has to be, because the system we have is simply supporting the "haves".

I was in a meeting the other day where people jumped on the reps from the utility (they are sending people around the region to grease the wheels, as it were, for the rate increases that are coming over the next couple years. A cute little public relations campaign, though I am not sure people are seeing it for what it is.

Anyway, the Chairman makes 3 million a year, way to hell more than most people here. Some of the folks, mostly a couple who work with WIC and areas of low-income, started asking the reps why he was worth so much more than the workers and got the usual "because he knows how to run this company very well". As I was walking out I heard a lady say something about how hard it would be to get someone that knew so much. Sigh, brainwashed.

[truedelphi]

18. Can you imagine the wonderful bullet train system we could have created

With the fourteen trillion or so already offered as namby pamby stimulus packages, and Bailouts to double dippers like AIG and Goldman?

And then there are the returning vets from Gulf II - their unemployment stands at 13 to 14%. If we could in in the defense spending so that the vets were able to find work at decent jobs, that would be a far more fair reward for their service than unemployment.

[jtuck004]

25. I forgot about that - good idea. We could do it now. n.t.

[laughingliberal]

9. Raise the corporate tax rate and give deductions for creating jobs

A defined deduction for each net job created so it's based on increased numbers of employees and not gamed by firing and hiring with no net job creation.

Raise the top income tax rate to pre-Reagan levels when those at the top were forced to invest or donate to avoid the high taxes.

[jtuck004]

14. We could make the deduction based on time as well,

so they have to retain them for a couple of years.

You are right - there is no incentive other than patriotism that would encourage them to invest their money in the country,
so I suspect a higher tax unless it is invested in the country for the long-term has to be part of this.

[global1]

11. Rebuild The Infrastructure Of This Country - Sewer Systems, Roads, Bridges, .....

the electrical grid. Solarize this country. Put in place 'solar panels'. This is how we employ all those people that are out of work right now. We're going to have to address the infrastructure sooner or later. It might as well be sooner.

[jtuck004]

15. Yup. China has apparently put in place a policy that they are going

to be a leader in solar and renewable energy. They attracted Applied Materials to build the worlds largest plant there, and are throwing engineers at it, while we concern ourselves with the jobs that undocumented workers take.

We are going to become bigger customers, and there is simply no need for it.

[fasttense]

20. Why non-government? Why put such a silly requirement on us?

FDR did fine with hiring people directly through the federal government.

In fact, to prevent the next crash, that is exactly what needs to be done. Hiring millions and millions of people through the federal government. It will cost a whole lot less, than what was stolen by Goldman Sachs and the banksters after the last crash.

There are numerous OPM jobs programs designed to hire students, vets, handicapped, military spouses, disadvantaged youths, the list goes on and on. But these programs are limited by their funding.

I would select one or two of these programs that has vague requirements and push funding (huge amounts of funding) through congress through the process of reconciliation.

I would then hire any American citizen who wants a job under this program. I would design the program so that the federal government paid $5/hour and covered the newly hired federal employee's medical insurance. People hired under this program would then be farmed out to schools, local government agencies, small businesses (very small businesses) non-profit organizations, even the unemployment office itself, almost any organization except large corporations and their affiliates (no Wal-Marts, GE or BP). The organization or business hiring the person would have to also pay $5/hour, so that the federal government paid half and the business or organization also paid half the salary for a total of $10/hr.

I would administer it through the unemployment offices. You could even design it so the unemployed person does the job hunting, after being certified eligible for the program by the managing office.

It would almost do away with the need to hire illegals because $5 an hour is cheap labor. It would allow small business to hire at half the cost and allow them to actually compete with corporate monopolies at some level. It would help schools, and state agencies and it would allow the unemployed a chance to obtain job skills or keep their current job skills up to date.

When things improve, the program can be slowly withdrawn. But all those people who were employed under the program now have usable, up to date work skills and experience.

It could be done right Now. It only needs a strong determination and administrator to put it into action.

[jtuck004]

24. I think that is a fine idea and in conjuction with something that

helps us get to the point near the end of your post "When things improve" would be helpful.

I don't think by itself it does anything but insure a continued need for government funding of employment far into the future. You are correct that FDR's plan was the right thing at the right time, but from my reading even he limited the amount the government would put into it, because he realized that printing such money devalued what was left. Then the U.S. hired millions of defense workers and soldiers, and instituted rationing, and spent more on this than the New Deal did. But private industry was able to sell it's output after the wars, and that's what brought us to where we are now.

Today, however, the need for "things" doesn't exist, since everyone is not coming off the farm. Cities are already here, and what we need to do is rebuild what we have - no money in that, but terribly necessary.

Until we have private innovation which creates wealth such a public program would slowly but surely make dollars worth less. I don't say that to argue against it - because as you say above "the program can be slowly withdrawn".

We need innovation, but I think what you proposed needs to go along with it. Maybe the gov could pay people to work in business incubators as well.

And thank you.

[fasttense]

31. Hmm, I think I understand what you mean. You are looking at more

than just getting back on our feet. You are looking for a new industry or way of life to revitalize demand.

I believe that demand will revitalize once you put money back into the hard working middle class and poor. But, you can also revitalize an economy by opening a new sector of employment.

So, here is something I've noticed lately that may be of use. I live in very rural America, breath taking, heart aching, beautiful rural America. Recently, everyone has gotten into flea markets and open air sales. From Farmer's Markets to huge fields of tables covered with second had household goods and inexpensive art work, to roadside and hot dog or bar-b-q stands, to massive markets for excess trinkets. If this really caught on, no one would be going to Wal-Mart. Just a thought.

[jtuck004]

33. I agree. Not only is it buying local (hopefully things that are produced

locally rather than purchased from China at Dallas Market Center and resold), but it also incorporates ownership by the people doing the work.


Thanks

[bemildred]

26. A really high progressive income tax that is the same for persons and corporations,

very high when income/profit goes over $500k per annum, and really low or nothing when profit/income is less than $100K per annum.

[jtuck004]

28. At first thought I really like that one - though I think if people

could take that money and invest it for the long-term into domestic manufacturing it would be a more effective use of the money. IF they kept it, or used it to trade in short term profits, or used it to manufacture overseas I think we should tax it away and use it for the country. After all, most of them would not have it were it not for the infrastructure that everyone else paid for.

Thanks

[Taitertots]

27. Manhattan Project level push for renewable energy

Centered on Hydrogen to Helium technology.

[jtuck004]

29. I will have to read up on that, but we do need something other

than electric for cars and trucks. Electric is great for daily driving, but for cross country and trucks we need more power in the vehicle, and from what I read hydrogen might be a possiblity.

Do you think it would be worth the same kind of effort to find a permanent storage or transforming process for nuclear materials, which could lead to an ability to use nuclear power for home and industrial energy? I know that is a hotbutton for a lot of people, and my perception is that the nuclear folks have not helped by being as forthcoming as BP with honest information, but when you look at the costs of coal and oil (especially in pollution and health) it seems like it might also be useful.

[Taitertots]

30. Not hydrogen as fuel, hydrogen for fusion

Turning hydrogen into helium similar to how the sun works. Then you use the energy generated to power cities and charge car batteries.

The ability to generate power from nuclear waste would still be beneficial and is worth looking into. Even if it is only used for existing waste, it would still more than justify the expense.

[jtuck004]

32. Did some reading. That would be a great idea. With enough spirit

behind promoting such an idea it could well be one of the technological innovations that could be a game-changer. Like a "going to the moon" plan. And we sorely need one of those.

Thank you.