You create jobs by not loosing jobs. Over seas jobs do not pay american taxes, but sends american money away from the country, out of the cashflow. Don't give money to companies that send jobs over seas. They are not creating american jobs. DO give stimulus money to companies in america so that they can keep employees that they would have to let go of otherwise. (this suggestion actually came from Steve Wynn of Las Vegas Wynn Hotel and Casinos) Yes, moving labor to cheaper countries is good for business, but it's bad for the country.
Here's a better idea. Don't give out any stimulus money at all. Give tax breaks to companies that hire workers here in the US. Create a job, get a tax break.
Even better? Recreate the entire tax system so that it makes sense and does the least amount of harm possible to the people that actually earned the money.
Or not pass a bloated healthsham bill that increases costs to employers, thereby keeping them from hiring workers!!!
How about the government doesn't meddle in the economy? Then all of the participants in it can make decisions based on economic realities, not political expediency. Want more jobs? Don't get in the way of those who create them.
Obama is going to create a lot of jobs...in Brazil, when we encourage them to drill and we become their best customer! Brazil is in South America so technically they are Americans too! Wake me up when it's election day 2012.
Industries change. It's only bad for the country if said country cannot keep up with the new skills needed. At some point no amount of tax incentives or stimulus will be able to hold back the tide of progress, far better to have a wide range of skills and the infrastructure to offer retraining so people can adapt rather than find their skills dying out.
WTF people...are we all asleep at the switch? Okay, I'll be the first to post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGZ1nK4mOuw
A better idea would be to get the government the fuck off the backs of businesses in this country so they can compete globally and win. We can always automate and crank out better quality products at a cost close to that of the slave wage nations, but things like the EPA are just devastating to US industry. Companies spend billions playing EPA games that kill productivity and don't make anything better or safer, just mounds of bullshit paperwork. That fucked up shit is why old factories set empty and no one wants to buy them, the EPA will blame a new company for something that was put into the ground 100 years ago and was perfectly legal at the time. Companies right now spend billions on disposal of things that are not in any way considered harmful right now, because they might be considered harmful by the EPA in the future and the EPA can impose "post facto" rules and laws.
Get rid of all the liberal labor laws such as affirmative action, OSHA, the 40 hour work week, child labor, the list goes on and on and then the American worker can compete on a level playing field with the Chinese worker and the illegal alien worker.
"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government." --Thomas Jefferson
There is no law that requires a 40 hour work week and never has been. The law only says that an employer must pay time plus 1/2 for all hours over 40 in a week. They can work you as many hours in a week that they want to. In Europe they do have laws that limit hours in the work week and it hurts manufacturing there in a big way.
This. On a somewhat related note - rich folks, celebrities and businessmen - keep insisting in various terms how much they care about the "economically disadvantaged" and most of them insist the government should do more and that they are willing to spend more in taxes. how about this - create a foundation jointly funded by as many of these noble souls as possible and call it, say, the Empowerment Foundation. The EF would issue grants to people, preference based on income, in situations where it can be demonstrated the grant Empowers people to be contributors to the economy and at least move towards self sufficiency. for instance: *A person has a job offer in another city and can't afford to move - grant covers the expense of getting there and setting up a residence *A person needs job training or a specific education; Not speaking here of a college degree, but, for instance, a ship-builder would hire welders and will commit to hire these ten guys if they are trained - grant pays for the training *A terminally ill patient needs home-care and the family can't afford to pay for it. Grant pays the cost to hire someone to do it for a fixed period, potentially renewable. *A person can get a job but needs a vehicle and/or wardrobe to take it. And of course, you could create jobs administering the thing and, in my opinion, hire auditors to check up and be sure that those grants are being used for the professed purposes. As long as you have enough sincere bleeding heart rich folks to fund it, and are responsible in selecting what sorts of grants actually improve economic conditions for the recipient, it should do fine. It would surely be more efficient than a government program.
Might be, but I hadn't heard of it being so restricted. And if it is, then hey - idea for a domestic loans business right here!
