I can't believe that the most obvious solution to the jobs issue wasn't proposed

[Duer 157099]

I know that Obama made a minor effort in this regard when he talked about removing (reducing? eliminating? we don't know) the tax credits to companies that offshore their labor, but why not just go full tilt in that direction and just simply eliminate ALL tax credits for ALL companies that offshore labor, and then give significant tax credits for those who bring jobs back to the US? Effective IMMEDIATELY. Not a year from now, not a month from now, but NOW.

Immediate influx of tax revenue, immediate influx of jobs.

I really doubt that giving incentives to "small" companies will have a huge impact on the jobs market, and besides, aren't those jobs typically minimum wage anyway? What we need is the return of the jobs that are well above minimum wage, if we want this economy to get a kick in the ass.

Why the hell isn't this a huge focus?

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Perhaps too many companies that offshore their labor contribute to Democrats.

..and that would not even take into account how the repukes would react.

[gateley]

3. I agree -- but actually because such a sudden move might be disruptive

to the companies.

In all fairness, you can't blame them if they were essentially enticed to go offshore. They are mandated to make a profit for their shareholders.

It's sickening, I agree, and the very rules and laws have to be changed, but probably need to be changed incrementally. As quickly as possible.

[Ian David]

2. A nuclear war between Pakistan and India would help.

However, IIRC, it would only take something like 12 nukes to destroy the entire world's ecosystem.

Remember: nuking a city is a lot different from nuking a pacific atoll or a patch of Nevada.

[unblock]

4. if you really want to stimulate the economy, you have to do it through the military budget

but that doesn't mean you have to do purely military things.

obama could deem that the u.s. needs a good, robust, high-speed rail system criss-crossing the nation in order to protect ourselves. in fact, any infrastructure project could be deemed to be of military significance.

we could then contract out the job to build all this, and voila, we've created a ton of new jobs and new businesses AND we've improved our infrastructure at the same time.

no way the republicans are going to be able to fight an increase to the MILITARY budget!

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. Yeah, it's probably good that Eisenhower was able to sell the Interstate Highway system that way.

If he would have just said "we need better roads to move people faster and get the thru traffic out of the cities" it never would have passed through Congress. (Just like health care didn't when Truman proposed it a few years earlier)

[OnionPatch]

5. But....but.....

that would be protectionism!!!

This is what all the GOP and half of the Dems will claim. As if our jobs aren't worth protecting. :grr: