How Do We Create More Jobs?

(Forbes, 2014)

Job creation...

CSPAN asked 'What Would You Do To Create More Jobs In The U.S.?'

Sure, we've had rather steady growth since Obama took office, and turned the boat around, but not all of that growth has been in the right direction. We got sidetracked by a bunch of old white men in suits who meet up in DC every once in a while to do nothing. We forgot about the hope we had for change moving forward, for a change in the morally right direction for the future.

“Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” ~~ John Maynard Keyns on Intellectual Enslavement.

What do we want most? Green energy creation on a steep incline of innovation. That's what most thinking citizens would like to see. Oh yeah, and jobs. Why didn't we drive the traffic in that direction? To begin with, we created a search Commitee designed to gather, vet, and fund green companies with Stimulus money. We tried that. The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Of the many ideas financed, naysayers pointed at some failures, like Solyndra and the stimulus funding came and went.

We want to concentrate on growing the United States Green Industrial Revolution, but the corrupt and the soulless spend money everyday just arguing with us about whether or not we even need to with an endless list of fake talking points not based in any real world conditions. So it's been hard concentrating on the end goal.

Maybe it's time to start over, to REALLY look at our tax policy, our government loans, grant programs, and our nation's executive's compensation.

Using the definition of green companies/green jobs loosely, we could fund sectors on a sliding scale based on a combination of several factors including things like the # of jobs created in proportion to the money given.

"The markets dictum is that the purpose of a firm is to maximize shareholder value. That is objective number one, and the first talking point of most CEOs, institutional investors, legislators, regulators, politicians, analysts and business school professors." ~~ Milton Friedman of the New York Times

Money can work like a carrot. If there will exist any green element of a new start up included in the cost of its doing business, there should be grants available for that venture. Larger funding for potential small business/non-profit works should be available for those who promise to work in good faith to be as green as possible. By now there oughta be a generally accepted checklist of what that means.

"People are paid to maximize profits. Employees are not paid to be good corporate citizens. Companies are not thinking about their responsibilities to the country as a whole." ~~ President Obama

You can say that again, "Employees are not paid to be perfect corporate citizens," but rather perfect worker bees delivering honey to the CEO and the shareholders. With no financial incentive to think about people before profits, how can we possibly hope to change the paradigm.

"The undiluted pursuit of profits for shareholders usually ends up destroying shareholder value." ~~ Steve Denning of Forbes.

Corporate greed has to be dealt with. And we definitely have kicked the can down the road on that one. Sure, some banks have paid out, but the essence of greed, one of the deadly sins, has not been dealt with. The interwoven profit for the sake of greedy profit ethic involved in running a capitalist country, with no regard for its citizenry, has not been seized upon, reformed, or regulated.

Howz about we attempt to encourage proper Executive Compensation levels? That would be a start. What say any company that agrees to put a ceiling on compensation levels for their executives, should have access to low interest loans through the Fed. Low interest loans in general would solve alot of problems and the government could make money on the money. If a company agrees to reinvest profits (those available over a certain percentage) back in the company and literally create more jobs, they'd get to the front of the line. Basically, we should financially encourage proper Executive Compensation.

If money is what our business sector listens to, let's talk money with them. Make jobs, get money. Create a green product with a green company, get money. Give raises to those at the lowest levels of your company, get money for expansion (for corporations over 100 people or so). Maybe we'd actually start to foster civil behavior by corporations.

"Corporations are neither physical nor metaphysical phenomena. They are socioeconomic ploys — legally enacted game-playing — agreed upon only between overwhelmingly powerful socioeconomic individuals and by them imposed upon human society and its all unwitting members." ~~ Buckminster Fuller

What do YOU think we should do? What do you think we CAN do?

The Policy Geek

Who Likes Firing People?!!

(Artwithme, 2011)

No one over here and no one we personally know has ever 'liked being able to fire people who provide services to us'. More likely, if you are your basic American citizen, wealthy enough to have people provide services for you (like everybody does) you tend to grow some sort of attachment to that person. Or you know someone's mother who makes friends with her housekeepers and gardeners and dry cleaning people. That's what we do. We say howdy, and 'how ya doin?" and in most neighborhoods we try to put one foot in front of the other every day to make rent, food, clothes for the kids, nights out have become impossible, so when we see each other along the way, we say, "whazzup?" and "howz it been?"  What we really mean is, "did you get that job?" or "do you still have a job?"  And we cringe a little bit inside knowing that chances are, either way, the answer is no.

(RoyaltyFree, James, 2012)

If you've ever been fired, it usually goes like this: surprise, anger, dread, acceptance, and then dread again. It feels so horrible and dehumanizing it can knock some people into deep depression. It's realizing all of your commitments and your bills are in danger of being late. You could lose your home, have to return things you bought lately, maybe even think about selling the car.  Those are the realities that people face when they "lose" their jobs. If you are actually the person to do the firing, well, it's horrible.You have to be a little bit of a sadist to offer to be the guy to do the firing in the first place. Even though it might be true that you like crushing people's lives and destroying their livelihood, announcing that you "like firing people who provide me services" has to be the stupidest phrase ever to be recited by a potential U.S. President, since Cain quoted Pokemon.  How could anyone like firing anyone?  Especially in this depressed job search centric environment we live in today??!  Well, in case you've been under a rock, yesterday Former Governor Willard Romney, who goes by Mitt, publicly declared, on camera  "I Like Being Able To Fire People That Provide Services To Me." Don't ya just love Election 2012?

(New York Magazine, 2011)

In response, New York Magazine asks, "Who Has Mitt Romney Fired, and How Much Did He Like Doing It?"  Admittedly, shortly after taking office as governor of Massachusetts, Romney canned 21 executive-branch press secretaries. To drive the point home, most of the other candidates in the GOP field today are feathering the Ark on which Romney will be leaving us with leaflets and media explaining the candidates image problems with Bain. He had a job, he did take over companies, he did over borrow on those companies, and he did fire most of the people at those companies, and then he did let those companies go bankrupt, after he had sold off the spare parts.  

(Time Magazine, 2011)

With Bain at his back, in the center of a perfectly scripted week where he had stuck to his amber waves of grain pun over and over and over, he goes all improv and just blows it. That's right, in the middle of what should be a JOBS ONLY conversation, Romney, the sure frontrunner who has been seen at at least one event a day giving the same speech everywhere, how he LOVES IOWA or LOVES NEW HAMPSHIRE of LOVES THE PEOPLE HE'S MEETING, he adds, "I Like Being Able To Fire People That Provide Services To Me."  That was yesterday, joy of joys, for anyone wanting to hear something new from Gov. Romney; however his choice of new material couldn't be worse as he comes out with his gem that may very well signal the time his yacht starts circling the drain. Ah...Willard...we knew him well.

That's the tenor of the people. Nationally, and internationally, the people are saying that the only conversation worth having is Job Creation. One of the major messages we've heard after slothing our way through Occupy Wall St, Occupy DC, Occupy Baltimore, Occupy LA (camping literally on the steps of City Hall) and even convening with the people from Occupy Maui at a GA, is that NO LEGISLATION SHOULD PASS THROUGH THE DOORS OF CONGRESS OR MOVE FORWARD IN ANY CHAMBER WITHOUT A SINCERE JOB CREATION COMPONENT.

 (transgriot.blogspot.com, 2012)

When JOB CREATION LEGISLATION AND PROGRAMS, with all the details, is the number one real need most Americans want to see met, where are the solutions? Where are the ones with the potential solutions?

With more jobs, there's more disposable income. People can go out again, buy flowers, and candy, go to movies (Valentine's Day is right around the corner so you see where our minds are.) People can pay for their car insurance, and they can pay tolls and buy gas, and new bras, and get that haircut or buy those new tires. With more jobs, we don't have to be so fearful to just say "hi" to the neighbors who most likely have a story to tell about their kids moving back in.

CSPAN asked 'What Would You Do To Create More Jobs In The U.S.?

Well, let's hear it. What do YOU think we should do?


The Policy Geek

Occasional Repost

Waiting For Godot

By Tim Valentine

(Valentine Art, 2011)

We have a question for our Republican, Conservative and Tea Party ‘friends’, regarding their support for tax cuts.

For years, decades even, members and supporters of your Parties, along with others, have told those who were disadvantaged that they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Often this advice was given without any consideration, comprehension or experience of what it is like to be disadvantaged, and with no thought as to their perspective.

Some have managed, against tremendous odds, obstacles and disenfranchisements to lift themselves out of desperate situations and into manageable ones. These people are Americans who often are left with few other dependable options for assistance. If you dare to have a conversation with, not at, but with, someone in these groups who are not Republican like yourself, you might just gain the opportunity to learn a different perspective that might lead you towards another consideration.

We are not as you describe us to be when you’re speaking to the media or your fellow Republicans. We are not as you assume, as you ignore our opinions and experiences or when you criticize Democrats or the President. We are Americans just like you.

(Adam Nelson, 2011)

So why should the Janitor, Building Attendant or Administrative Assistant pay more in taxes in terms of the rates and percentages than the CEO, IT Director or the Delivery Driver?

Why should people who are economically identifiable as what any economist, financial professional or tax codes would consider Middle-Class, Working-Class, or Unemployed pay more in taxes? Did you know you pay taxes on Unemployment? Those entitlements are not tax free. Especially why should our fellow Poverty-Stricken Americans who are often under-employed, pay more in taxes than those  who the same economist, financial professional or tax codes would economically identify as Upper-Class and in more common terminology, Rich or Wealthy?

• CNN Politics: “Cantor Says No To Jobs Bill Spending” 
• CBS News: “House GOP Rejects Obama Jobs Proposal”
• The New York Times: “House Republicans Outline Common Ground on Jobs”
• GOP.gov: “House Republicans Plan for America’s Job Creators”

(Adam Nelson, 2011)

The full version of the House Republicans Plan for Jobs is 10 pages.  President Obama’s is 199 pages. How comprehensive do you suppose both plans are in comparison? Simply, which proposal is a better plan for how to create jobs? Are you purposely trying to unemploy Americans?

We ask you these questions, because what you’re doing by taking these positions in your campaigning and policy proposals contradicts the best economical interests of those who support and align themselves with your ideology and principles! Statistically the Republican Party include a high percentage of believers who are by all economic indicators Middle-Class, Working-Class, Unemployed or among the Working-Poor. You've grabbed many of the less educated and less informed.

(Adam Nelson, 2011)

Are the values of your largest and frequent financial contributors more important than those who vote for you? Do you take these positions without consideration of their actual effect they will have on the real Middle-Class, Working-Class, Unemployed or Working-Poor? Do you know your policies will in no way benefit them? Are you comfortable with only benefiting your major contributors?

Perhaps it isn’t about people for you, but the position, perception and power that is the motivation. When you have taken seriously what the American Jobs Act is outlining and proposing, it is difficult to understand why you oppose the bill. Anyone who loves and respects America would agree upon the tenants of the American Jobs Act, making it difficult to ignore the questions asking for the true reasons as to WHY you would oppose the bill. You’ve had to of proposed these same suggestions at some point in your career or at least mentioned them. Generally ya liked these things before you were agin' 'em.

We, continue to gather and wait for your response, because this isn’t about the election, but about We the People. We the People who can not continue to wait.

I’m providing a direct link to the American Jobs Act (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/reports/american-jobs-act.pdf) as reference for these questions we, the American people who are considered Middle-Class, Working-Class, Unemployed and Poverty stricken, request your response.

Tim Valentine

Occasional Repost

(GetReligion.Org, 2007)

My friend Mark Dorlester's OpEd.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just opinion:

We, the nation and we, Obama supporters are in one hell of a pickle. Idon't need to recap the headlines; you know the top national problems, and much of the news today was on the idea that the national self-deception of the past 10 if not 30 years has finally been penetrated: our problems are real, serious, and they will not simply go away with the next business cycle.

Further, we Obama supporters all have areas of great disappointment with the President - in terms of our expectations 3 years ago vs. the reality so far.

But we have a critical choice: we can accept that whoever gets the Republican nod will be somewhere between "not at all to our liking" and"lethal to our democracy" and therefore we can rally to support Obama, or we can let our national problems and political anger fester and watch the country go off the proverbial cliff. The worst of all worlds would be to work like hell with no focus and no attention to Obama's re-election needs, so that our effort is largely wasted.

You should know by now that I'm not a Kool-Aid drinker. I carry no one's water. I have strong independent opinions. Nonetheless, I hereby declare that this situation is one of very, very few in my life where I am, however reluctantly, willing to sublimate my own drives - in most areas - to those necessary to get Obama re-elected. We are entering a"political 9/11" situation until the next election. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that if we lose to the political right, there will be no hope left (pardon the entendre). I've been telling friends and family for 10 years now that our democracy is gone. If we lose this one, it will never come back. Wisconsin was not an uplifting harbinger.

The next few weeks are the calm before the storm. The political power bases in Washington are taking the typical August break - assuming the stock market doesn't sink another 20%. In any event, after Labor Day, all hell will break loose and it will likely stay that way for 14 months. The question for us then becomes: what do we listen to for guidance, and where and how do we target our efforts?
As to guidance, the laser-beam answer: we listen for direction really intently to the White House and the campaign, not to the pundits. Not to the news grabbers. When we need to vent, we clearly so state and do not - ever - try to divert attention out of frustration. This is hard for independent-minded folk like us. So was Normandy.

As to focus, I suggest we mentally divide our thinking into 2 major categories: (1) issues and (2) battleground states. On issues, obviously, it's jobs, jobs, jobs and programs creating them. On battleground states it's Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Florida, and then New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, and Minnesota. That is, as of today. As time goes on, the campaign will let us know how the map is playing out. We MUST keep in mind that presidential elections are NOT - repeat NOT - national elections.Electoral votes are tallied state-by-state. No national popularity poll has any electoral meaning. Going nuts for Obama within California or New York is worse than foolish - it helps the Republicans by wasting valuable Obama resources where they have no electoral impact. Therefore I, a lifetime Maryland resident, will be putting in whatever I can to help in Pennsylvania and Virginia, not downtown Baltimore.

This is not to say that there won't be serious work to do in all 51 electoral states. It IS to say that an infrastructure program that does more for Michigan than for NYC is the one we want to support. Keeping EPA's reach softer in Pennsylvania may be temporarily necessary to keep those folks employed, like it or not.

Above all, we simply cannot afford no-return wild goose chases having zero electoral benefit/potential. I don't know about you, but that's a harsh reality for me. I like the freedom to go wherever my mind takes me. But a lack of discipline in this election risks a Fascist-vision Bachmann society, or a Yee-Hah Anarchist-vision Perry Society, even if Hidden-vision Chameleon Romney were to win.

That is an unacceptable risk for me.

Enjoy the break.

-Mark
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Interested in contacting Mark? I would be happy to forward any emails to him.)
Lisa Lindo
thepolicygeek@gmail.com