what is the best way for America to create more jobs?

[trenchfoot]

Sorry OP, I cant resist this opportunity to poke the repubs in the eye on this: To create more jobs, have the repubs quit telling people that cutting taxes and deregulating is the way to go for creating jobs. All the repubs did during the Bush/Cheney years of cutting taxes and deregulating was to raid the treasury and make loans that they now want the middle class and the poor to pay back. They took the money and ran, leaving the rest of us to make the payoff.

Eight years of Bush/Cheney proved that little lie of theirs as ULTIMATE FAIL. Yet, they keep pushing this lie as if the eight years they had their chance to prove what they were spouting about and miserably failed at never happened.

IT DIDN'T WORK. Give them another chance and they'll do it all over again. They can't help themselves. Those eight years proved that beyond doubt. They're not interested in creating jobs unless it helps the rich get richer, which is all they care about.

What's also not working toward creating more jobs is their holding the nation hostage in their singularly devoted attempt to get rid of Obama. The repubs have successfully kept the Dems on the defensive, forcing the Dems to spend most of their time defending what meager repub-eviscerated accomplishments they've already gained and blocking any other programs the Dems feel will help in getting the jobs situation and the economy up and running before they inevitably lose their hold on the Senate and the White House.

What IS working is the repubs efforts at convincing the voting public that whatever subterfuge and sabotage they've been up to toward torpedo'ing Obama's chances at another term is actually Obama's ineffectiveness to lead.

Granted, Obama's style of leadership have contributed to the repub's ability to grind our economy to a halt in their hopes that it will allow them to retake the gov't and miraculously create jobs by duplicating what they did under Bush.

But the repubs will keep this nation on its knees until they get their way again unless the voting public sees through their damaging ways and make the necessary changes to have the gov't focus on jobs, which is not a priority of the repubs at this time. Or was it ever?

 

[BoberFett]

A service based economy doesn't necessarily have to pay workers less, to have high unemployment, or a totally lopsided distribution of wealth & income.

Of course not, but when people talk about how much we need to eliminate out of our health care spending, they should realize that those are the jobs of the future. Manufacturing as the basis for an economy is dead.

Don't play the fool, OK? I said nothing of the kind. I referenced the cause of collapse, then & now, a credit bubble, created by those free market capitalist forces Jaskalas luvs so much. Boom & Bust are basic characteristics of poorly regulated capitalism, particularly of raw unregulated capitalism.

And the fix for the Great Depression was a war which consumed our manufacturing capability and removed millions of people from the workforce. None of the other bullshit that Democrats pretend fixed the economy mattered. A war which then allowed the US to prosper for decades afterward. Prosperity which we thought we keep prop up with further wars, hot and cold, and massive deficit spending.

Facts are facts. Americans are going to have to get used to a lower standard of living. And we're going to have to figure out how we can maintain a middle class built on service jobs such as healthcare. Someone's going to have wipe all those Baby Boomer's asses.

 

[K1052]

This.

The Chinese undercut all the US bids and promised an earlier delivery date (which didn't happen).

Caltrans has fucked up the entire Bay Bridge project beyond belief, this part included.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Facts are facts. Americans are going to have to get used to a lower standard of living. And we're going to have to figure out how we can maintain a middle class built on service jobs such as healthcare. Someone's going to have wipe all those Baby Boomer's asses.

Here's a thought. How 'bout we do away with business as usual? We can control the way businesses operate in our own country and, by economic influence, much of the rest of the world.

How much longer do you think American middle class (if such a thing even exists anymore) and, working poor are willing to take it in the shorts before they start voting fringe wackos into office in the hope for change?

My own thoughts are on a requirement for all U.S. corporations to have a minimum of 51% of all employees both, directly employed and sub contracted, be American citizens. Will we lose some businesses? You bet and, in the long run, that's a good thing. If we've learned one thing from the bank bailouts and other financial disasters, it's American business won't change unless forced to.

 

[Jhhnn]

And the fix for the Great Depression was a war which consumed our manufacturing capability and removed millions of people from the workforce. None of the other bullshit that Democrats pretend fixed the economy mattered. A war which then allowed the US to prosper for decades afterward. Prosperity which we thought we keep prop up with further wars, hot and cold, and massive deficit spending.

Facts are facts. Americans are going to have to get used to a lower standard of living. And we're going to have to figure out how we can maintain a middle class built on service jobs such as healthcare. Someone's going to have wipe all those Baby Boomer's asses.

The bit about the war is a matter of opinion & emphasis. The millions of people removed from the worldwide workforce were also consumers, so I'll rate it as a wash on that level. It did largely destroy the industrial capacity of the rest of the world. Domestically, govt spending and war time rationing created huge pent up consumer demand. People were eager to spend the money they were forced to save during the war, and industry adapted quickly.

The constructs of the New Deal were the forces that, post war, allowed us to build a middle class rather than a repeat of all other previous business cycles, where growth went to the top, destabilized, then crashed the economy, over and over again. High taxes on high earners. self amortizing mortgages. rules & regulation of finance. SS. Unemployment insurance. on and on. The more we move away from those successful ideas, the less stable our economic system has become.

There are also the physical resources left behind by the New Deal- roads, bridges, buildings, flood control & irrigation dams & associated infrastructure, hydroelectic facilities, reclamation efforts for the dustbowl, museums, art, advances in medicine, and a photographic record of the era. thousands of campgrounds & trails in national forests & parks- things of benefit to us all that private industry likely never would have accomplished.

So you'll forgive me when I jump all over the modern twits of Libertopia whose heads are fused permanently into their rectums as a sign of ideological purity, people who espouse poisonous & proven to fail right wing propaganda as reason.

And if Americans in general need to accept a lower standard of living, then our wealthy need to do so, as well, if we're to actually maintain domestic tranquility & egalitarian democracy.

 

[sandorski]

The Chinese undercut all the US bids and promised an earlier delivery date (which didn't happen).

Caltrans has fucked up the entire Bay Bridge project beyond belief, this part included.

Infrastructure needs to be built, lots of it. Now(technically a couple years ago) is the perfect time to build it.

 

[BoberFett]

Here's a thought. How 'bout we do away with business as usual? We can control the way businesses operate in our own country and, by economic influence, much of the rest of the world.

How much longer do you think American middle class (if such a thing even exists anymore) and, working poor are willing to take it in the shorts before they start voting fringe wackos into office in the hope for change?

My own thoughts are on a requirement for all U.S. corporations to have a minimum of 51% of all employees both, directly employed and sub contracted, be American citizens. Will we lose some businesses? You bet and, in the long run, that's a good thing. If we've learned one thing from the bank bailouts and other financial disasters, it's American business won't change unless forced to.

Do whatever you want. Facts are still facts. American prosperity has been built on cheap foreign labor and debt. Remove either or both of those and you have a lower standard of living for the average American. Redistribute all of the wealth from the hated, evil rich and nothing will change. Why? Because the cost of goods will keep pace with any changes in income. We still live in a physical world based on scarcity. Until you create a Star Trek replicator, that's life.

 

[BoberFett]

The constructs of the New Deal were the forces that, post war, allowed us to build a middle class rather than a repeat of all other previous business cycles, where growth went to the top, destabilized, then crashed the economy, over and over again. High taxes on high earners. self amortizing mortgages. rules & regulation of finance. SS. Unemployment insurance. on and on. The more we move away from those successful ideas, the less stable our economic system has become.

The prosperity of the latter half of the 20th century is and always was unsustainable. We tried to fake it, and look where it got us. All the government programs and regulation in the world won't make up for the fact that Americans were living high on the hog based on cheap foreign labor and debt. Hell, those government programs absolutely depended on our unrealistic standard of living. European socialistic economies (the ones that aren't crashing at the moment) are not more stable simply because they have regulations and social security systems. It's because they simply have less shit than Americans expect to have.

And if Americans in general need to accept a lower standard of living, then our wealthy need to do so, as well, if we're to actually maintain domestic tranquility & egalitarian democracy.

To an mosquito, does it matter whether he gets splattered on the windshield of a Yugo vs a semi-truck? The wealthy will always live extravagant lives compared to the average citizen. Take all their wealth and redistribute it and it won't make a lick of difference. There will be haves and have-nots. You just sound jealous.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

American prosperity has been built on cheap foreign labor and debt. Remove either or both of those and you have a lower standard of living for the average American.

Because that's the model that has got us to this point so, that's the model that has to be followed forever more? You and 'Big Bidness' just doesn't get it.

America has reached the point where business as usual won't be tolerated. Unless the corporations come up with a workable plan themselves (never gonna happen) voters will begin trying ANYTHING to create a better standard of living.

You think we saw chaos in the housing market? America hasn't seen anything yet. Mark my words, the political scene and shady business practices are going to explode making the great depression look like a thoughtful pause.

 

[sandorski]

The US is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If it had not elected Bush twice and followed that failed Fiscal policy over the edge, not only could this mess have been avoided, your Debt be a fraction of what it is, y'all fighting over how low to set the Debt ceiling(assuming you'd even worry about lowering it), but you'd also have a position of strength in negotiating with China's currency manipulation(assuming it would still be a problem) and also China's Environmental regulation. Unfortunately you're in a position where China has the upper hand and now they dictate to you your Internal Policy, albeit indirectly.

All the Deficit Hawks are a decade late and so misguided that their focus is more Politically motivated and only concerned about getting Power. Their myopiticism(word?) is so great they fail to see that the US is but a shell of what it was a decade ago. It will likely recover, but if you keep doubling down on the same failed Policy, I wouldn't count on it if I were you.

 

[IGBT]

get rid of your obama.. he's the kiss of death to jobs and business. Which also means he's the kiss of death to tax revenue.

 

[dmcowen674]

remove the minimum wage

remove a lot of regulations

lower the tax rates on corps

To compete in the global economy we need to bring manufacturing and other unskilled jobs back to the US.

What's low enough for you? They work for 25 cents an hour overseas.

Removing regulations resulted in the banks too big to fail, you want more?

Corps don't pay taxes, they have a PO Box in Bermuda and don't pay taxes.

As far as skills go, you and your kind keep screaming for Americans to go into debt for College to obtain skills. You can't have it both ways.

Pick one side of the fence and stay on it.

 

[Jhhnn]

The prosperity of the latter half of the 20th century is and always was unsustainable. We tried to fake it, and look where it got us. All the government programs and regulation in the world won't make up for the fact that Americans were living high on the hog based on cheap foreign labor and debt. Hell, those government programs absolutely depended on our unrealistic standard of living. European socialistic economies (the ones that aren't crashing at the moment) are not more stable simply because they have regulations and social security systems. It's because they simply have less shit than Americans expect to have.

That wasn't true at all until Ronnie took the Whitehouse. Offshoring was just a gleam in the eye of American Capitalists.

To an mosquito, does it matter whether he gets splattered on the windshield of a Yugo vs a semi-truck? The wealthy will always live extravagant lives compared to the average citizen. Take all their wealth and redistribute it and it won't make a lick of difference. There will be haves and have-nots. You just sound jealous.

That's not true at all, other than the part about haves & have nots. Had 1980 income distribution held steady, family income for the bottom 50% of filers would be ~40% larger.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Hand-waving that away is an act of willful blindness.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

As far as skills go, you and your kind keep screaming for Americans to go into debt for College to obtain skills.

Here's one of the biggest problems in the US, people actually think that going to college gives you skills to manufacture goods. We need to people going to trade schools to learn how to actually do something productive. We already have enough college educated people performing flunky jobs.

 

[rudder]

Here's one of the biggest problems in the US, people actually think that going to college gives you skills to manufacture goods. We need to people going to trade schools to learn how to actually do something productive. We already have enough college educated people performing flunky jobs.

because if you do not go to college you will have to actually work and get your hands dirty. The ones who are not spoiled will realize you can make a good living with tool and die skills or plumbing skills, etc.

Another issue though is illegal immigration. The illegal immigrants have supressed wages across the board. Take your high school grad who wants to become a plumbers apprentice. Do you think he could spend years working for $5-6/hour? Same for the high school graduate that wants to become a carpenter. No one can afford to work while learning trade skills... well except for the illegals.

 

[K1052]

Infrastructure needs to be built, lots of it. Now(technically a couple years ago) is the perfect time to build it.

I agree, in fact I'd support real infrastructure spending at many times the level we do now and the establishment of an Infrastructure Bank.

That does not however change the fact that the Bay Bridge replacement project has been an expensive disaster from start to finish due to mismanagement at Caltrans and political meddling.

 

[BoberFett]

That's not true at all, other than the part about haves & have nots. Had 1980 income distribution held steady, family income for the bottom 50% of filers would be ~40% larger.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Hand-waving that away is an act of willful blindness.

And how does absolute income matter at all? Those same people would still be purchasing the same goods. Because we live in a world of scarcity, those 40% larger incomes for the bottom half would have had exactly the same purchasing power as they do now. Or do you think everyone in America would have a McMansion and be driving their Hummers and Mercedes back and forth between Tiffanys and Saks?

 

[ElFenix]

So you would send all those foreign manufacturing plants here in the United States packing back home? They are outsourcing, are they not?

last i checked most of those plants were owned by the companies whose badge went on the product, so, no, not really.

 

[Jhhnn]

And how does absolute income matter at all? Those same people would still be purchasing the same goods. Because we live in a world of scarcity, those 40% larger incomes for the bottom half would have had exactly the same purchasing power as they do now. Or do you think everyone in America would have a McMansion and be driving their Hummers and Mercedes back and forth between Tiffanys and Saks?

Hogwash. What you're saying is that a near third world income distribution curve would yield the same purchasing power at the 50th percentile as a high middle first world distribution curve, that the GINI coefficient is meaningless.

People at the 50th percentile & below would be purchasing more & better goods and services. Income wouldn't be rushing to the top creating asset inflation & instability, and less of total cashflow would be hoarded by the very few very wealthy who are doing just that today.

The fact that you necessarily resorted to hyperbole indicates that you have no argument that's rational, that you're now merely defending prior erroneous assertions.

 

[sm625]

Only parts of the New Deal were effective. Glass Steagall is one example. But that has been dismantled, which is a big part of why we're going to go through it all again.

To answer the OPs question, to create jobs we have to lower the standard of living. In fact our standard of living has already been reduced by more than 50% since 1980. It is only a large credit bubble that has masked the effects of that loss. So what is another 50%? Maybe two more 50% reductions in standard of living, combined with wage and environmental parity tariffs would make it profitable for companies to create jobs in america. Reduce corporate taxes to 10%, increase the top marginal tax rate to 65% (to encourage capital formation rather than consumption). After a 10 year period of rather extreme pain, the US would emerge as a lean and strong economy that would grow at a healthy rate. Good luck winning an election with a plan like that!

 

[BoberFett]

Hogwash. What you're saying is that a near third world income distribution curve would yield the same purchasing power at the 50th percentile as a high middle first world distribution curve, that the GINI coefficient is meaningless.

People at the 50th percentile & below would be purchasing more & better goods and services. Income wouldn't be rushing to the top creating asset inflation & instability, and less of total cashflow would be hoarded by the very few very wealthy who are doing just that today.

The fact that you necessarily resorted to hyperbole indicates that you have no argument that's rational, that you're now merely defending prior erroneous assertions.

The top can only consume so much. I'm talking about actual consumption, not income and investments. Unless you believe that the entire country could consume a lavish lifestyle sustainably, I'm not sure what your point is.

And it's funny you use the word "hoard", talk about hyperbole.

 

[soulcougher73]

Well its obvious the policies weve put in place the past 25 years have not worked. So anyone who says to continue on with the status quo went "full on retard". So what that means is globilization has not worked out well for the US. Well except for the megacorps who give two shits about the US.

 

[piasabird]

Quit importing cars.

 

[rudder]

Quit importing cars.

So what your saying is GM, Ford, and Chrysler would have to close their plants in Mexico? Or scale down operations and keep those cars in Mexico? If Ford closes their plant in Germany... will VW have to close its new plant in Chattanooga, TN?

Is it okay if I buy a Nissan? They are built about 45 minutes from my house.

A better idea is a hands off approach. Look at Boeing. They are having trouble competing with Airbus. Boeing tried to open a new plant in the Carolinas... but the Obama administration would have none of that. Airbus orders are outpacing Boeing orders by a large margin... yet the Feds are busting Boeing's balls.

 

[ElFenix]

So what your saying is GM, Ford, and Chrysler would have to close their plants in Mexico? Or scale down operations and keep those cars in Mexico? If Ford closes their plant in Germany... will VW have to close its new plant in Chattanooga, TN?

Is it okay if I buy a Nissan? They are built about 45 minutes from my house.

A better idea is a hands off approach. Look at Boeing. They are having trouble competing with Airbus. Boeing tried to open a new plant in the Carolinas... but the Obama administration would have none of that. Airbus orders are outpacing Boeing orders by a large margin... yet the Feds are busting Boeing's balls.

yeah... not really
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/06/29/obama-hints-boeing-union-should-settle-their-differences/