After all of the bailouts, TARP, etc., it seems that Obama and Congress are just spending $ that we don't have like drunken sailors. Shouldn't there be more focus on creating jobs, and improving the economy?
I believe spending tax payer's money by congress or president is not legal or right. The same time creating jobs and running economy is not duty of congress or White House, unless they are socialists they do. Congressman and president sworn to protect country and Constitution of US. That's all.
You're 100% right! Maybe if they stop outsourcing all our Fortune 500 companies overseas, there'll be jobs for us! I've been unemployed for 1.5yrs & its not because I'm not looking or that I'm not qualified for anything, its because all our jobs are going to countries where English is a 2nd or 3rd language & its all because CEOs, CFOs, etc... found they could pay workers in a 3rd world country 1/2 of what they pay us even though Americans are so much more qualified! Its F'd up, isn't it?
Thats the million dollar question I believe, you bet there should be a lot of focus on that. It seems however, not so!
Well, you can't force companies to create jobs. Those will eventually come. But the thing I'm most suspicious of right now is all those banks that got bail-out money are doing incredibly well on the stock market mere months after the bail out.
Shouldn't that have taken longer? Maybe they didn't actually need it after all.
I Think the problem is the market for Goods world wide. If it was really open for more trade, we would see more jobs.
Yes!!! But we must realize that once it leaves Obama, it's left up to our local statesmen, and from what i see, they are screwing us over! Now, something should be done about that!
Tom wrote an interesting hub about this
http://hubpages.com/hub/identity-politi … lture-wars
You really believed that money was going to be used to create jobs and not to bail out their banker friends? In that case, I have a bridge I want to sell you. It's potentially situated on beachfront property.
The bad thing is, like in my state of Michigan, all their eggs were in one basket.
For 20 years economists were warning Michigan to stop making the automotive industry their focus of production, but more and more factories continued to open to ride the bandwagon of the car makers.
Now that the industry has crapped out, thousands of factories had to close because they only had one service, and that was to the automotive industry.
The term "create jobs" is really a bad term...
You can't "create jobs", either there is a demand, or a surplus in industry.
What they need to "create" is industries that are meeting demands.
If economists were right about the eventual collapse of the automotive industry, then chances are they will be right about what the current demands are.
Build your industry around demand, and don't put all your eggs in one basket.
Exactly, nice to see another person of reason around here.
I had an idea for my state, since we have literally thousands of abandoned industries, many of which have direct access to the railways, waterways and highways ebcause they fed the needs of the automotive plants, thece facilities are already zoned, wired and ready for production. they are just waiting for a company to step in and take the facility over adn start producing something.
Someone should create an organization specifically for matching the needs of new industry with the location of currently existing facilities here in michigan.
This would bring new companies in, creating jobs and cutting costs for start ups because of the pre-made ready facility just wating to get to work.
Just an idea...
Yes! Absolutely! So far everything being pushed through congress is hurting jobs and American competitiveness. Money policy too is inflationary and will surely lead to pain years down the line.
Yes, there should be more of a focus but right now the #1 priority is giving Obama Drama his landmark victory and issue he will always be known for and that is healthcare.
Obama Drama's main priority is making himself look good and not the economy or our troops dying in Afghanistan (what week are we on since he said he would make a decision....10 or 11 weeks now??).
Right now, Obama Drama and the Democratic party's major concern is to try to save face and not get killed in the mid-term elections. Other issues have to wait.
It might also help if we made it more attractive for businesses to operate here.
Does anyone think that by Obama focusing on health care, that that will help improve the economy, and create jobs like he's been saying? It seems to the focus is misguided.
It may not create more jobs, but it would most certainly save a lot more lives. Which is more important, life or jobs? Who's focus is actually misguided?
Easy to deny if you are fortunate enough to be surrounded by insured adults. I have had misfortune of going to a funeral for a life-long family friend, and getting a phone call - while sitting in the funeral - that another life-long family friend had just passed away. A third call came in to tell me that my 4 y/o nephew had a close call, thank God he was insured and able to get appropriate and timely life-saving care. Both cases of the dead friends stem back to the fact that w/o the luxury of insurance (shame to consider it a luxury, but it is) they can't get treatment until it's an emergency - which in both cases happened to be too late. With the luxury of insurance, you can go to the doctor just to find out that you have a condition that need to be treated. Do I believe it to be FACT that it would save lives? You Goddamn right I do!
You are assuming this 'plan' if it were to pass, would be effective. Do I think the people who brought you potholes, the DVM, and public school might fail or make things even worse? You're goddam right I do!
Because a step in the right direction will eventually reach a desirable destination. If you stand still long enough, it eventually becomes equivalent with moving backwards. I know that what we have now is not effective. If we don't move in one direction or the other, we are not going to fix anything. A plan is a living document. A plan doesn't have to work or be effective at the onset of implementation. Most plans implemented have wrinkles to iron out, but eventually improvement follows. So yes...I assume America, beyond all the political BS, produces wise enough leaders to devise, implement, monitor, and revise as necessary, a plan that will improve the state of our health care insurance industry.
Again, you assume this is "a step in the right direction." I think it may very well be a giant leap in the wrong direction. Different point of view and all that.
Absolutely! The best part is all government has to do is get out of the way! Well they do need to correct problems with trade. The trade deficit is hurting the job market.
I don't have the same perspective as what I have read.
While I do agree that we live in an unjust system the answers are not found in making America "more attractive" to business, or simply putting a "focus" on the economy.
There is a term "race to the bottom" and it refers to global corporate business/government relations.
Business seeks to take advantage of weak/corrupt governments in order to establish bastions of cheap production/mineral extraction. Take Shell Oil's recent out-of-court settlement with the Ogoni people as an example, with the oil corporation using the Nigerian government and military to kidnap, arrest, torture, and murder the leaders of local populations that are deemed "problems".
A look just across the southern border area businesses have very cheaply set up shop producing clothing, electronics, and many other goods headed straight for American markets, in cities like Juarez. The role of the police in Juarez, as in other northern Mexican cities, are to aid in the surveillance and harrasment of potential labor conflicts.
And then there is the Citibank memo on "Plutonomy" which I suggest people read, especially in Part 2 when explaining why oil prices would not drop even though popular demand cried out for mercy (http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674229/Citig … ort-Part-2).
I also believe that the glorified "American Economic" days of the past are commonly misconceived, in that America's prosperity in the 20th century was based on its war material production, loans and infrastructure reconstruction during and post-war, and a domination of global markets because the British, French, German and Japanese (among others) were, on one hand, consuming American goods while, on the other, were absent in larger foreign trade....in other words the corporations of the United States had very little competition domestically or abroad.
The rest of the world, in some sense, has caught up...I call this a normalization, but this changes when one takes into consideration how the "race to the bottom" principle and profit for profits-sake business model is currently redrawing the American map.
What is the fate of the West Coast Longshore and Warehouse Union, and what does this mean for organized labor, especially during this ongoing wartime "terrorist" era (which limits the union from being able to strike)?
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean.
To say it briefly, America gained from the lack of global industrial competition, and since the resurgence of these foreign production centers, has suffered. It's easy to be the leader when there isn't anyone else around to compete with.
Some say the definition of insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results
I'd like for Obama focus on helping the markets so that companies can create jobs instead of having the government create jobs. The last thing I want is more government bureaucrats.
And yet I'm not considered a genius
Must be the lack of letters after my name.
Investment is the key to an improved economy because it will generate jobs. Obama administration should focus on this which in due time will also increase the buying power of households and create savings.
absolutly, if not, I fear we will be in another mass depression like we had in the 1930's..I do not want to be forced to live that way, they already took away our SSI cost of living increase, wich is a very small yearly increase this year..and my husband works at an auto stamping plant, when he stated there in 1993 there were 3500 employees, now there are only 2 shifts and 350 employees, and thats counting the office, sales, etc..
very , very scarey...but at least his experience and performance kept his job.
They just mentioned on the news that unemployment is now the highest it's been in 26 years. It was high too in 1983; when Reagan was President and the Republican's held the Senate.
Wow, I guess you don't know your contemporary history either. Unemployment was that high because of what Carter did during his presidency, not who happened to win elections after his term. Also, if you remember, Reagan cut the top income tax and we had an economic boom. Unfortunately, the Senate and House were dominated by Democrats and spending did not decrease, which was what killed the boom in the very early 90's.
Well, then you can't blame Obama for the unemployment due to what happened in the last administration. Unemployment does not happen immediately. It's like, no matter what came before it's always Obama's fault. And you can't blame Republicans for anything because it was the Democrats who came before them.
I'm going to ignore your patronizing tone again, I guess we can't all be as much of a know-it-all as you are.
Do you not understand what you hero's stimulus was about?
Ah name calling, the last refuge of a Progressive who can't argue the facts. Thanks for playing.
Must be hard to live with perfection...
Your jibes about people not knowing anything about history because they disagree with you is just another form of name calling, just a passive/aggressive way.
You're the one who claims I think I'm perfect. I can remember times on the forums where either I have *gasp* admitted I was wrong, or apologized for being mistaken in an assumption I made.
Actually I think you're projecting your foibles and follies on others. Seeing as you're always the first to tell us how we should be doing things when what we do doesn't affect you one bit.
Actually, what happens in the US does effect the rest of the world, especially the economy. I state my opinion. Gasp...and I do it on a public forum...
Well, maybe not perfect but you do come across as patronizing at times.
Sorry I called you a know-it-all, I let the heat of the moment get to me.
I'm curious, how does our 20% unemployment rate affect you in any way?
I think you should have the 'HOMELESS" rate included. Wall Street, doesn't account for homeless people.
The homeless rate in America is 12.5%, and these people are also not accounted for as citizens or people in general. They are dismissed to spend their life on the street, because there is NO REAL assistance available. We have 40 Million homeless and only services to account for 700,000 for only singular days.
It is pathetic that the facts are skewed as they are. I've done my own looking in to the matter and written about what I've found.
Either way, it would be nice if people changed their perspectives so others can find compassion, love and understanding. This would help more than anyone realizes.
Sorry the real number is closer to 20%. Government statistics don't track people who have run out of unemployment, nor do they track people who are no longer looking for work. Good old Billy Clinton's administration changed the way we compile those statistics.
Actually, there is quite a bit of assistance, it's just not governmental, and so goes unreported by the government. I've worked with the homeless and there are many religious orgs that give a lot of help out of sheer goodness of heart. It's one of the best things I've ever come across and renews my faith in people.
Actually, I would beg to differ. With my clarity- I can see what you do and tied it to the lives of other instantly.
If you think what you DO doesn't effect someone else or how you act out in public does not effect people.
It would be an illusion to believe that you have no effect on people, while you are in a public view of any manner.
If you go to dinner, how you act with who you are with is SEEN by those around you. Your actions and words, people hear or read, that come from you EFFECTS others.
It is your irresponsibility about being self-responsible, which is where you have errored in your way.
Your perception of reality isn't what it should be and you need to re-adjust your simple-minded approach. To think people are below, because they lack knowledge that you possess isn't for you make claims of any sort.
You may or may not be smarter about some area or another, but the people you are talking or interacting with, might be pretty smart in some of the areas you lack.
That now puts you both on equal footing. The problem here is that you're talking about politics. STOP for a second, then start from the beginning, but WITHOUT the political prejudices you both have. You want to address the problem, then put BOTH your minds - together - so a problem can be fixed, instead of bickering with each other.
Ummm....can I point out something- 'passive/aggressive' way. It a contradiction.
If you are passive, you cannot be aggressive. It's oxymoron.
Passive is calming, exact opposite of being aggressive.
Sorry to say.
Actually the term is defined as "Passive–aggressive behavior (negativistic personality trait) is passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to following through with expectations in interpersonal or occupational situations.
It is a personality trait marked by a pervasive pattern of negative attitudes and passive, usually disavowed resistance in interpersonal or occupational situations.
It can manifest itself as learned helplessness, procrastination, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness, or deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible. It is a defense mechanism, and usually only partly conscious."
It is a real term
This actually needs explaining? Help us all.
The topic of this hub is about jobs and the economy. Maybe if kids were educated properly and forced to complete an education then unemployment would not be such an issue. There is only so much you can do.
If the Dems keep it up, it could get ugly for them in 2010. I'm not a big fan of the Republicans either, but I wish that some of their bills could get presented. There are some good ideas. And I hope that the GOP will go back to fiscal conservatism.
It's getting worse each election...more and more of those who are looking out for thier own interestes in the guise of caring about what the constituants concerns are.
But that said, I still wouldn't trade this form of government for any other. I just wish they would get their act together.
I don't think getting more jobs is something the government can do directly. It can create an atmosphere for it to take place but the real solution is with the private sector. Perhaps some tax initiative towards companies that will keep their business at home could help but then you will have to face the retribution of the foreign countries who we trade with.
The loss of jobs is staggering and many of them will not come back. The service industries that we have been moving towards are beginning to feel the foriegn labor market taking over. White collar jobs that Americans were being paid $100,000 per anum are being done for $24,000 by those in foreign labor pools. Corporate can pocket the savings now called earnings and do nothing to replace the loss.
As much as 79% of jobs being lost will not return to our country. By 2015, some 3.3 million service-sector jobs, representing $136 billion in wages, will be shipped overseas or rendered obsolete by technology. The percentage of jobs being offshored is expected to roughly double in the next three years. An average of 13 percent of jobs are already located offshore, and an additional 12 percent could be relocated within the next three years.
As long as we have the short sighted Walmart attitude of buying at the cost of our own jobs destruction the effect will eventually be felt by corporate when we have no jobs to pay for their goods.
Good job getting the right "climate" for job creation with the current "Tax and Spend" Congress in place. What do you think the effect is of levying taxes on the top 10% of the earners in the nation? More money in taxes means less for job growth. It's really a simple concept.
He is not my hero. I personally don't care what happens in the US...as long as it does not effect us... I was just stating a fact that I heard.
Oh, I guess you fooled me. For someone who doesn't care you sure have a lot of opinions on the US, does everything that happen here effect Canada?
i think at the current conversion rate, her concerns are a little more than the value of them in the US? I'm not sure on that though.
I think 1 Canadian "I don't care about the US" = is worth approximately 1.24 "stay out of it then" at the current exchange.
Before you can tackle this problem you must understand the cause of this problem.
The cause for the jobless is "GOVERNMENT" programs, intervention into society, taxation, regulations and other pressures applied to business.
Why? Because what controls your ability to get a job. The Government "Employment" program offered to the public, so they can have or make money.
This program was designed because people lack the understanding to true wealth. That understanding has many people left to ponder a lie and misconception about Life.
The fact that 'money' is a requirement for anything is appalling, but since the invention of currency, money is required for almost everything.
Now- the BEST way to make wealth or build a fortune is to WORK FOR YOURSELF!
This isn't a joke. As a business owner, you set your hours, you set your pay and you answer to only yourself. Therefore, no one controls what you earn(like a job), what hours you work(like a job), what time you take a break during your work hours(like a job), or how long you are going to be employed(like a job).
There are TOO many advantages to working for yourself, but there is also a lot of integrated knowledge that is needed, to build wealth and unbelieveable responsibility. How ever, the responsibility of owning a business, even a small one, isn't as difficult as it appears.
Most definitely! I need a job thank you! I am going insane without being able to teach little kids and having fun creating masterpieces with them. I am tired of being stuck home all day. Yes it's great becaue then i can work on my stories but still. As I have told my husband, I think and get better ideas for my stories while I am working.
I NEED A JOB! And constantly searching for a teaching position when the others are hanging onto them for dear life is becoming disheartening.
Again, the question is: How does the 20% unemployment rate of the US affect anyone outside the US?
I don't know for a fact but I am sure it effects imports and exports.
The US auto layoffs have definitely hurt Canada with many plants closings and job loss here.
Sorry it's affecting Canada UW...I have a few other friends there too. I need to visit one of these days!
There were some bailouts...by our Conservative government.
A conservative in Canada would still be a socialist!
Amazing how it must sound But I have no idea who Mr. Harper is, nor do I care, he is Canada's problem! See how that works?
Ah, we're not the only ones who have politicians shilling for votes then. That's something, I suppose. Let me ask you, are Canadians better off with or without the bailouts?
I am not sure. I'm doing fine. Our unemployment rate has stabilized at around 8.6%.
Sure, only because the Big Three, or Not So Big Three as I like to call them, are kept on life support through the bailouts. What happens when those companies fail and all that money is lost? How many "saved" jobs will you lose then? It sounds like your leaders have just thrown good money after bad.
how can we buy all those great electronics made in other countries if we don't have an money?
Or the shoes (many made in Pakistan), and the clothing in Walmart made in Pakistan and china.
There are actually a lot of effects our lack of consumerism has on other countries.
Let's not mention the cars
The simple answer is that orders for goods will be down and will exponetially affect those who trade with the US.
The current rate of 10.2% is staggering when you think of it and that has caused such a negative view on the recovery. But even if we are to come out of this recession slowly the effect should be more dramatic but not immediate for foreign labor as orders pick up. The US workforce will basically be out of the equation for some time because more jobs will be gone for good.
People have been making such doomsday predictions for decades and decades but here we are.
The truth of the matter is that we are a product of our own success. The drive to outproduce and lower costs while seemingly destructive to domestic job loss does not help us pay for the products with no job. Simple math.
The loss of jobs has been increasing every year for the past twenty years. Whether you wish to believe this is a product of big business getting its way or the work force getting lazier the facts are hard to dispute. Maybe a doomsday is not in our future but I do believe we will be living a lifestyle far much lower than we had anticipated.
Our economy has constantly been changing since the country began. Our lifestyle has steadily improved throughout.
Why are you liberals so afraid of change?
You have a tendency to throw that liberal tag on me even though I side with many consevative views but that is okay if it helps you. I really vote both ways and it is based entirely on the issues and not the ideology. As a matter of fact I voted for Bush the junior the first time around while I corrected that the following election. Unfortunately Kerry had no message or platform.
Change is why I voted for Obama. I don't agree with many of his decisions but change was at the heart of it and I hope somehow this all comes out in the wash. My friend you really don't know me if you say I am afraid of change.
Aren't positions on the issues based on ideology?
And here I thought you finally understood me...
The American work force is the hardest working, most productive in the world and big business has rarely if ever gotten its way.
I know the American workforce was a power to be reckoned with the last century but the jobs are going away at an alarming rate and this is not only relegated to the manufacturing and blue collar sector. Engineering and white collar jobs are being farmed off too. India and Thailand workers are paid a quarter of what is payed here. How are we expected to take a seventy five percent cut in wages to compete to get those jobs back. Big business is very cozy with this scenario and the record profits that they have enjoyed. They surely wish to continue and if possible escalate this trend.
Hardest working and most productive!? Maybe the patriot PR society...
The hardest working - yes. Big business 'rarely' gotten it's way - no.
Which is why we have so much spare time to post on internet forums.
Did you think that comment was logical, or were you just trying to be 'cute' again?
Please excuse me for the typo, I must have been take aback, the second exclamation should be read as a question. If the American people are so hard working and productive could someone please explain why the US consumes so much from other nations, i.e. is a nation fed on imports rather than a nation thriving? The Indians are rapidly booming in what could quite possibly be a dominant power in the not too distant future. The Chinese are hard working and productive. Using either India or China as a contrast, how is it that the USA is the hardest working or most productive? Entertain me...
For a nation with such gargantuan power, the work ethic and efficiency of the USA is rather insignificant. The ethics of the USA regarding work is pure capitalism, to sell at the highest price, make the greatest profit and with the least work possible. If you can equate good business with these fundamentals well congratulations, you win this time but reap what you sow America. Just remember that everything evolves. Just you wait for the next sleeping giant.
Bailouts: It sucks but think about the options. First look at what the bailouts do for common people. If the banks were not bailed out then savings of common joe would be wiped out. Its not just the big investment banks but the roll over would have been catastrophic. Similar with the auto trade, if auto companies bust it affects everyone, from the new cars with no parts to the truckers and the groceries you survive on. Auto companies are tied up with one another in a huge web.
What happens post bail out is the important question. Do we let it happen again?
tksensei: I have restrained myself too many times now but I cannot anymore. I don't really care about community spirit and all that and if hubpages doesn't like what I have to say then so be it.
<snipped - no personal attacks in the Forums>
Don't be so hard on TK. He represents the antagonist that is needed with any debate. What I enjoy the most about his posts are that he kind of hits you a little off balance sometimes. I even find that he reinforces some of my opinions by being diametrically opposed and keeping it real with his mainstream vies.
OK, I can sympathise with your comment and I have tried to get along with tksensei but I am not convinced this person is an idiot just ignorant and arrogant. A fine example of exactly what the problem is. Not a voice of but THE problem.
I knew you understood my role in the universe!
I do not believe that there is a sure fire way to just "create jobs and fix the economy." If it really were that easy, someone would have figured it out by now. There were attempts to create jobs, I believe, but it was temporary. The government cannot just create jobs out of thin air. Due to the dip in the economy, many professions have taken a hit, but there is not way to just swoop in and fix it all. This situation took time to create, it did not happen overnight. Much like an individual who gets into significant debt, our economy will struggle before being able to start to climb out of the hole that was created.
by Mike Russo 4 years ago
During Obama's state of the union speech, he stated that he wants the minimum wage raised and is going to raise it for federal employees. He implied this will create jobs. The republican party countered with: Where are the jobs?" House Republican Conference Chair Cathy...
by John Holden 4 years ago
Looking for this for ages, finally found it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKCvf8E7V1g
by American View 7 years ago
Can you believe it. In response to a question at a town hall in Decorah, Iowa, Monday evening, President Obama said that when Congress returns in September, "I'll be putting forward...a very specific plan to boost the economy, to create jobs and to control our deficit. And my attitude is get...
by Rebecca Graf 9 years ago
I think that we can all agree that the economy is a mess. There were many contributing factors: shaky loans, bad decisions, and high gas prices. There is probably not one particular area to point a finger at that we could all agree on that led to it all. But should companies like...
by Dennis L. Page 6 years ago
Do tax breaks for the rich really create jobs?Nick Hanauer, a venture capitalist states consumers create jobs and not the wealthy. He claims the rich only hire if consumers are buying goods and products and that there are not enough wealthy to support our economy. He says, "If it were true...
by Holle Abee 6 years ago
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysi … -Karma.htm
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|