Obama to create 3 million Jobs

[Elphaba]

If we are going to help people, let's really help them. Let welfare recipients get a job and make real money while they recieve aid

Done.

...so that they can eventually stand on there own.

Done.

give corporations hug tax relief for expanding and creating new jobs ( and hold them accountable).

Done.

Each of your suggestions was implemented over a decade ago, and frankly, it exasperates me you don't know about this, given your wont, and everyone else's, to demonize any government involvement whatsoever.

Clinton promised welfare reform, and he came through when he signed “The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,” (PRWORA). The act came from bi-partisan efforts, including the Republican’s “Contract with America,“ group. The act is still considered, today, to have been a fundamental shift in both the method and goal of federal cash assistance to the poor.

PRWORA demanded welfare reform, which was accomplished by eliminating the standard open-ended Aid for Dependent Children (welfare). It was replaced by a new, closed-ended program that requires recipients to either be looking for work or training for work, with the stipulation that s/he has two years to accomplish this.

This new program is called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and has been very successful. For example, since TANF was initiated, welfare rolls have dropped substantially, from 12.2 million in 1996 to 4.5 million a decade later. At the same time, caseloads declined by 54 percent. Sixty percent of mothers who left welfare found work, far surpassing predictions of experts, from both the left and the right, that TANF would fail.

Through the Welfare to Work Partnership, more than 20,000 businesses hired 1.1 million former welfare recipients. Of those likeliest to slip into long-term dependence -- young mothers who had never been married -- job training allowed between 80 to 100 percent of them to leave welfare and pull themselves out of poverty.

I am extremely passionate about this subject, as I’ve been on the front lines, and I've seen what these government programs do to help people. Heck, I was one of them.

Then I became the teacher, and saw my success repeated over and over and over again.

We are not talking about potted plants here. We’re talking about people--people motivated to change their lives but lacking the funds. So, the government steps in and provides financial aid, including TANF. With this aid people obtain the marketable skills that ensure they will be employable, and they also pay their tuition back to the government via their taxes.

Obviously reality is much more complicated than I'm representing. If it were allowed, I could write a book about this stuff. (And yes, I realize I often do. )

It is also obvious, however, that those who claim all government involvement is wrong are denying how complex this issue is as well. We all need to maintain perspective and understand these issues are not black and white.

Regardless, it is a fact the government's educational financial aid benefits not only the person, but the employer and the community as well. In fact, an educated workforce benefits all of us.

Even you, Bytor.

Elphaba

[austro-libertarian]

Regardless, it is a fact the government's educational financial aid benefits not only the person, but the employer and the community as well. In fact, an educated workforce benefits all of us.

Even you, Bytor.

Elphaba

Elphaba,

Don't we all benefit from others who shower and have pretty smiles? Should government therefore subsidize showers and bars of soap, dentistry services and smiling classes?

[austro-libertarian]

You'd prefer to see them starve while our free market economy "corrects" itself?

Godless,

Do you really, really think the US is a "free market economy"?

[FunkyTown]

Godless,

Do you really, really think the US is a "free market economy"?

Austro - The problem, and the fear, is that in the whole history of man there has never been a true Free Market.

The reason it doesn't exist is that there will always be a big dog. It's in Humanity's nature that, in the absence of a ruling structure we search for our own. Many laws were passed specifically because of abuse that occurred when something was not specifically outlawed.

People are afraid, Austro. People are afraid because humanity isn't perfect and people are afraid that a truly hands-off market will result in the powerful Corporate interests outshining powerful Government interests.

Since people feel that they have an elected say in Government interests, many are afraid that a true Free Market would just be a Tyranny by another name.

[austro-libertarian]

FunkyTown,

I appreciate your post. The first thing I thought of was this Benjamin Franklin quote:

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.

I would argue that they also won't get either liberty or security. A few more comments (none of these is really a critique, just some thoughts):

Austro - The problem, and the fear, is that in the whole history of man there has never been a true Free Market.

The reason it doesn't exist is that there will always be a big dog. It's in Humanity's nature that, in the absence of a ruling structure we search for our own.

Putting this in a gospel perspective I would say that people are always worshiping something, even if it is not Someone. Not putting God first only means people are putting something else first. That is how I see your comment of "we search for our own." People that don't have faith in God, just show their faith in whatever they replace Him with, e.g., sports, music, education, anything. To say someone does not have faith at all isn't really possible; it's just a matter of where you exercise faith, made manifest by your works.

People are afraid, Austro. People are afraid because humanity isn't perfect and people are afraid that a truly hands-off market will result in the powerful Corporate interests outshining powerful Government interests.

Since people feel that they have an elected say in Government interests, many are afraid that a true Free Market would just be a Tyranny by another name.

I understand people are afraid (who does that come from?), and people cry out for security and safety. When I re-read your sentence above ("People are afraid...") I am reminded of the premortal council described in the scriptures. Even back then one-third were deceived and chose what they perceived to be the more sure path, because "humanity isn't perfect." Satan sought to take away everyone's agency, arguing that everyone could be perfect and would not be lost. Jesus Christ and Heavenly Father of course did not allow that to happen. The plan where we would be able to choose for ourselves is the only way for us to truly be happy and return to live with Them.

It should now be blatantly obvious to even those less perceptive to truth that Government is currently aligned with Corporate interests (this is nothing new) in some sort of fascist, totalitarian government. In asking the free market question, I am only hoping to point out that, to those who really appreciate the idea behind liberty and free markets, Big Business (Corporate interests) and Big Government are both enemies of free markets. I despise Big Business, recognizing that it is only b/c of Big Government that they can have monopoly power and unlimited access to a printing press (a love of and access to money). Anyone who argues that the US is a free market, or even more astonishing, that Bush is a free marketeer, and coolly blows the straw man down is difficult to take seriously.

[FunkyTown]

FunkyTown,

I appreciate your post. The first thing I thought of was this Benjamin Franklin quote:

I would argue that they also won't get either liberty or security. A few more comments (none of these is really a critique, just some thoughts):

Putting this in a gospel perspective I would say that people are always worshiping something, even if it is not Someone. Not putting God first only means people are putting something else first. That is how I see your comment of "we search for our own." People that don't have faith in God, just show their faith in whatever they replace Him with, e.g., sports, music, education, anything. To say someone does not have faith at all isn't really possible; it's just a matter of where you exercise faith, made manifest by your works.

I understand people are afraid (who does that come from?), and people cry out for security and safety. When I re-read your sentence above ("People are afraid...") I am reminded of the premortal council described in the scriptures. Even back then one-third were deceived and chose what they perceived to be the more sure path, because "humanity isn't perfect." Satan sought to take away everyone's agency, arguing that everyone could be perfect and would not be lost. Jesus Christ and Heavenly Father of course did not allow that to happen. The plan where we would be able to choose for ourselves is the only way for us to truly be happy and return to live with Them.

It should now be blatantly obvious to even those less perceptive to truth that Government is currently aligned with Corporate interests (this is nothing new) in some sort of fascist, totalitarian government. In asking the free market question, I am only hoping to point out that, to those who really appreciate the idea behind liberty and free markets, Big Business (Corporate interests) and Big Government are both enemies of free markets. I despise Big Business, recognizing that it is only b/c of Big Government that they can have monopoly power and unlimited access to a printing press (a love of and access to money). Anyone who argues that the US is a free market, or even more astonishing, that Bush is a free marketeer, and coolly blows the straw man down is difficult to take seriously.

You're absolutely right, Austro. The government is in cahoots with big business: The bailouts, the 'donations' from corporate sponsors. It's just one big love-fest in North America between two groups that should(In theory) be at odds: Corporations attempting to make money, Government interceding and stopping their excesses.

Your argument about the pre-mortal council is one I have struggled with myself. My concern, however, is that the plan of salvation was enacted by perfect beings and our world is run by far less than perfect beings.

I am personally enraged when I see governments spending $300+ on a hammer in activities that are clearly kickback designed. On the other hand, when I see Doctors in private practices getting kickbacks for prescribing medicine that is not optimal for their patients, I am just as enraged.

What's the answer? I just don't see an unregulated economy being the answer. Frankly, I think there's only one government that will work the way it's supposed to and that ain't happening until the Saviour comes back.

[rameumptom]

If we believe in FREE MARKET, it will eventually correct itself. With government interference expect a worst situation to come later...hint - Social Security, Public Welfare and so forth.

I believe in a free market. But we don't have a free market. Free market implies that entrance into and exit from the market is equally accessible for all. While true of trade between the states, which share a common free trade basis, this is not the case in our global economy.

France and others subsidize companies (we do it occasionally, as well). China uses prison and child labor, ignores safety and environmental requirements, and pays their people a low wage. If the USA threw away its environmental protections and safety issues (does lead really harm our children anyway???? ) we'd stand to profit more.

Next, our tax system is all out of whack for us to compete in the global community. It worked fine when we did our own manufacturing, etc., because all states had to deal with it. Now we are dealing the nations that are not taxing corporations and businesses, in order to have them move to their country (from here, usually), and to help the companies maximize profits. They obtain their taxes from the employees and tariffs, instead.

A decade ago when the market fell and Congress issued new rules to govern money markets, most of the market moved to Great Britain. The new regulations we are about to place on ourselves could easily push more companies and jobs elsewhere.

Every decision has unintended consequences. With making truly free markets, we risk people failing and hurting. With regulated and taxed markets, we push up the costs, reduce the number of people working, and push companies to go elsewhere. You have to decide where the balance will be.

Currently, the balance is in China's favor. We need to go back to a progressive flat tax or FAIR tax (preferred), and remove all corporate taxes (since we pay them anyway). We encourage companies to come back, especially in the tech and manufacturing fields. Where other nations are dumping subsidized products on us, we place tariffs to help our companies compete.

We shouldn't make it easy for our companies to thrive, but we should give them an even and equal playing field. Foreign cars should be taxed to the tune of putting them within 10% cost of an equivalent American car. This will also encourage foreign manufacturers to build here, since it isn't any cheaper to build elsewhere.

As for Obama's creating jobs, I'd prefer he pass a few laws like these first. THEN I'd like him to take most of the $1 trillion+ dollars and just divvy it up amongst the American people to do as they please. They can use it to pay off their mortgages, pay down debt, buy a new car/house/tv, whatever. That will help create many jobs quickly. Then use the rest for infrastructure: roads, bridges, new energy, etc.

[Hemidakota]

but I digress.. this topic is about OBAMA... Savior of the Universe! .. key music and lights

Something that had me laughing when his wife spoke. We can add this like we did on some of those 'Bush moments' and now, another added historical laughable moments - 'Obama moments.'

[FunkyTown]

I believe in a free market. But we don't have a free market. Free market implies that entrance into and exit from the market is equally accessible for all. While true of trade between the states, which share a common free trade basis, this is not the case in our global economy.

France and others subsidize companies (we do it occasionally, as well). China uses prison and child labor, ignores safety and environmental requirements, and pays their people a low wage. If the USA threw away its environmental protections and safety issues (does lead really harm our children anyway???? ) we'd stand to profit more.

Next, our tax system is all out of whack for us to compete in the global community. It worked fine when we did our own manufacturing, etc., because all states had to deal with it. Now we are dealing the nations that are not taxing corporations and businesses, in order to have them move to their country (from here, usually), and to help the companies maximize profits. They obtain their taxes from the employees and tariffs, instead.

A decade ago when the market fell and Congress issued new rules to govern money markets, most of the market moved to Great Britain. The new regulations we are about to place on ourselves could easily push more companies and jobs elsewhere.

Every decision has unintended consequences. With making truly free markets, we risk people failing and hurting. With regulated and taxed markets, we push up the costs, reduce the number of people working, and push companies to go elsewhere. You have to decide where the balance will be.

Currently, the balance is in China's favor. We need to go back to a progressive flat tax or FAIR tax (preferred), and remove all corporate taxes (since we pay them anyway). We encourage companies to come back, especially in the tech and manufacturing fields. Where other nations are dumping subsidized products on us, we place tariffs to help our companies compete.

We shouldn't make it easy for our companies to thrive, but we should give them an even and equal playing field. Foreign cars should be taxed to the tune of putting them within 10% cost of an equivalent American car. This will also encourage foreign manufacturers to build here, since it isn't any cheaper to build elsewhere.

As for Obama's creating jobs, I'd prefer he pass a few laws like these first. THEN I'd like him to take most of the $1 trillion+ dollars and just divvy it up amongst the American people to do as they please. They can use it to pay off their mortgages, pay down debt, buy a new car/house/tv, whatever. That will help create many jobs quickly. Then use the rest for infrastructure: roads, bridges, new energy, etc.

I really have nothing to add. I agree with you on everything, Rame. Just want to show my support.

[Hemidakota]

If anyone hasn't heard this morning, the Chinese government is lending its financial arm to keep the market going.

[bytor2112]

Each of your suggestions was implemented over a decade ago, and frankly, it exasperates me you don't know about this, given your wont, and everyone else's, to demonize any government involvement whatsoever.

Hi Elphaba......I am familiar with Welfare reform, perhaps my post was a bit confusing. My suggestion that we cut non-essential programs and foreign aid and really help those in need is not said out of ignorance to the progress made. When I suggest allowing welfare recipients to have real jobs and earn real income while receiving assistance, I am not disparaging those on the welfare rolls. I am suggesting that I would much rather see money sent to foreign countries.....be used in more meaningful ways to REALLY help those in need. So in my opinion not DONE or certainly not DONE well. I know this comment is unreasonable, but, I would personally rather buy someone a home with tax dollars and give it to them, than give them a barely sustainable life via welfare checks and government subsidized housing. My rather disjointed point is that we are giving them the money anyways, why not do something worthwhile for the recipient, rather than token measures that do very little to lift.

Corporate tax rate is 35%? Let's cut the rate to 15% or even 0% and tie it to hiring. I would much rather have a job than a government check that barely sustains. At least then, you can have your dignity and the opportunity for advancement. So not DONE......

Finally, I don't demonize Government involvement. I demonize the ineptitude of the government. Good intentions paved the way to hell........ I am all for more effective government, smaller government and government programs that really assist.

[Elphaba]

Don't we all benefit from others who shower

It depends on whether showering makes the students more employable or not.

Obviously most employers require their employees to be clean. If this became an issue for the student, there are a number of ways to address it, the first being to contact the parents and get them involved.

Should government therefore subsidize showers and bars of soap. . . .”

No.

and pretty smiles.

The vast majority of employers do not care if an applicant's smile is pretty or not; therefore, pretty smiles do not benefit us.

Should the government therefore subsidize . . . dentistry services?

No.

However, if a student does have bad teeth, which could affect her employability, we would train her how to find a dentist willing to take a payment plan. Thus, she would learn another life skill, and again, no subsidy for dentistry services.

Should the government therefore subsidize . . . Smiling classes?

If the course is "smiling" and nothing else, the answer is no. Smiling,in and of itself, does not make the student more employable; thus, there is no benefit to us.

However, there is a business communications course that covers non-verbal communications. I assume "smiling" is included, since it is non-verbal. This is a required course for all students, and since it does make the student more marketable, we benefit from it..

Therefore, yes, the government should subsidize the studentt's tuition for this class, which is usually in the form of financial aid.

Anytime a student finds a job s/he can raise her family on, with benefits that relieve the fear of medical catastrophe, we all benefit.

So, you sound like an expert. Where do you go for "smiling" classes?

Elphaba