Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We will need a much more aggressive jobs program from Obama.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:15 PM
Original message
We will need a much more aggressive jobs program from Obama.


At the rate that we are bleeding jobs, over 500,000 jobs last month alone, Obama's proposed jobs program won't even bring us back to where we were a year ago. It's also my understanding that his program is spread over a two year period. God knows how many more jobs we will have lost by then.

This is one of the reasons it's a bad idea to allow the tax cuts for the uppermost income to expire. He will need the revenue from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. we need 30 million jobs in this country
2.5 million is nice, but kind of a spit in the ocean.

we're set to lose over 2.5 million just between the election and the inaugural.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Exactly. What may have looked good to his campaign a year ago
or however long ago it was that he came up with this plan, is now way outdated and not much of a remedy. If he were forward thinking, he would realize that the loss of jobs is taking on a snowball effect. Any plan for future jobs has to take into account an accelerated rate of loss in several industries across the spectrum. 2.5 million is nothing, not even really a plan, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. he would also realize that any penny spent on a supply-side bailout
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 01:35 PM by leftofthedial
is a penny wasted AND a penny lost to real remedy--job creation. The ONLY economic remedy that will work is job creation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. FDR started most of these programs soon after he entered office:
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 01:22 PM by Selatius
http://home.earthlink.net/~gfeldmeth/chart.newdeal.html

Most of the programs were started in 1933. The most famous, the WPA, was started in 1935. The WPA alone employed 8.5 million at the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. three years is way too long to wait, I'm afraid.
the capitalists have gutted this nation like an illegally poached bear.

We'll all be Friedman-style jerky in six months, never mind three years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. massive re-industrialization of the US. radical times require radical solutions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Azlady Donating Member (889 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. yep -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. Definitely! Obama only talks about creating "green" jobs,
which is a very worthwhile idea, but we need traditional manufacturing too. Where he really worried me during the campaign, when he talked about outsourcing, was when he said, "not all of those jobs are going to come back." Why the hell not? I say do WHATEVER it takes, including tariffs.

Of course Obama may realize by now that the ideas he put forth during the campaign for rebuilding the economy simply didn't go far enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #15
35. I suppose you would have be in the vaguard of those pushing for more horse&buggies...
After cars were invented?

:rofl:


Just being "traditional" is NOT in and of itself sufficient reason to go with it. The world is much more complicated than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #4
41. !!!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ben_meyers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. FDR had a plan
17 million citizens in the military for the huge public works program called WW2.

Do you feel a draft?

From Paul Krugman:

What saved the economy, and the New Deal, was the enormous public works project known as World War II, which finally provided a fiscal stimulus adequate to the economy's needs.

This history offers important lessons for the incoming administration.



http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/10/news/edkrugman.p...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'm worried that this New New Deal will just throw money at corporations.
I'm sorry, but I'm a little scarred by what's been going on with Halliburton and no-bid contracts and such. I have a bad feeling that the beneficiaries of these infrastructure rebuilding contracts will get real good at getting more money appropriated but not much else. Also, let's face it, not many Americans have the skills needed for construction jobs, and manual labor is pretty much out for most people over the age of 40. That said, I don't oppose the idea at all; I just have my reservations as to how it will be executed. The first thing that needs to be done is to root out all the Bushies who are embedded in civil service jobs!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. The era of no bid contracts may be over.
I doubt if you see Halliburton and the like sucking up taxpayer money like they enjoyed for the last eight years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabbycat31 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #6
40. I worry about that too
Hopefully the Obama administration will prosecute some of these no bid contract companies (Halliburton, Blackwater, KBR, etc) but I am not getting my hopes up.

I do hope that they make Halliburton incorporate IN THE US instead of Dubai so they can pay their fair share of taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. You're right, we do.
Far too many jobs are being lost, not to mention how many more will be lost in the not so distant future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
12. We need to rebuild our antique Electric Grid...
I hope Obama doesn't neglect our aging and rickety electric grid.

We need wind farms, solar farms, new high tech transmission lines and an electric rail system.

This would supply MILLIONS of jobs and free us from our Saudi captors.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
13. how will letting the tax cuts expire lead to less revenue?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. simple. the treasury takes in less taxes. less taxes = less revenue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. when bill clinton RAISED the tax rates- revenues went up.
obama wants to take the rates back to clinton levels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. He's not going to rescind the tax cuts on the wealthiest, like he promised.
He was planning on using those cuts for some of his proposals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Yes, he is.
Its merely a matter of how soon to do it. Now, or when they run out anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Allowing it to elapse is not the same as rescinding it, and it will
cost us billions in tax dollars lost. He told us numerous times he would rescind it. He's not doing so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. True
and not rescinding it now isn't the same as NEVER rescinding it ever, which you implied in your wording.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. but letting the cuts expire means that the rates go UP, and more revenue comes in...
your saying that when the cuts expire and the rates go up, revenues will decrease? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. how did you manage to get that out of what I said?
I'm saying that for the next two years we will lose out on the revenues that we would have to help pay for programs, because the tax cuts that Obama promised to rescind are going to expire instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
18. Time for a "Manhattan Project" to create a carbon-neutral infrastructure.
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 11:01 PM by Odin2005
THAT will create the jobs we need. We have the means to make the US #1 again, LETS DO IT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
20. You would rather have a six month plan than a two year plan?
Won't we still have problems a year from now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Why will it take two years to put 2 million people to work?

And we both know that more than two million jobs were lost in the last six months. How many more in the next two years? He needs a better , broader plan to put one hell of a lot more people to work than just that amount. Do you have any idea how many jobs were created during the Clinton administration, WITHOUT a public works program?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. clinton had the benefit of a technological transition for a lot of companies...
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 11:16 PM by QuestionAll
as well as people working on the y2k bug.

and the end result of many of the technological transformations meant that fewer workers are needed by them now.
there was also still a much stronger manufacturing base when clinton came into office. MANY MANY MANY more companies decided during the go-go 90's to go-go to china.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. you are making excuses.
We can rev up the mfg base again. It takes the political courage to do so. If the crisis becomes big enough, (ie. peasants with pitchforks time) you'd be amazed at what the govt. will all of a sudden be able to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. they're not excuses- they're FACTS...
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 11:30 PM by QuestionAll
and "revving up the mfg base" is going to be EXTREMELY difficult in those many many many instances where all of the machinery has either been sent overseas or just scrapped.
it sounds like you may be the one who's going to be amazed.

btw- you still haven't explained how letting tax cuts expire lowers revenue... :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. 2.5 million jobs, not 2 million.
And those will lead to other jobs being created.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. Did Clinton walk into a shit hole of a mess like Obama is walking in to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #21
37. ooh. and you with your expertise and brilliance know just what to do
:rofl:

DU is a riot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. Yeah. You're on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
30. So how fast do you expect him to wave his magic wand and get
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 11:42 PM by firedupdem
every job lost back? Be serious...I'd rather he state an attainable figure than to just make up one to cover every job lost last year or last month.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. I AM serious. Why don't you get serious? How much sense does it make

for Obama to be going around STILL talking about a TWO TEAR 2.5 million job program, when we've lost more than that in the last year, and are set to lose millions more in the next two years? It's a meager program, by any measure and we all know it. He needs to talk about expanding the program. That's the point I'm trying to make.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. I'm sure Obama is retooling....but at the same time he's gonna stay honest.
So for now he is saying 2.5 million jobs.....cause that is what he has come up with thus far.
1/2 a million jobs were lost in November alone...remember?

Today is December 7th.

I'm sure he's working on it.....
In fact, I'm certain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. That's my point...he can talk about expanding it all he wants but we
are in a deep hole economically. Where is all the money going to come from? People are already bitching about the money it will take to try and get 2.5 million working. Sure, we need more than that but since he's not in office yet and truly unable to make a promise like that why would he boost up the numbers only to fail at reaching the goal? I'm hoping it expands but I just can't see him turning around years of loss overnight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:42 PM
Response to Original message
31. STOP OUTSOURCING
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #31
43. Hell Yes.
It's killing us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 04:47 AM
Response to Original message
38. I'm thinking it's like trying to close a gunshot wound with a Band-Aid.
Simply put, the Friedmanite cancer in the form of quarterly profit-based economics is dead-bolt installed and isn't going away. Nobody is addressing the inherent problem of runaway greed in the form of CEOs and other assorted minions, bean-counters and hangers-on who still think that Corporate America can operate as it did during the Reagan-Bewsh loot-o-rama party where everyone, including the politicians, does everything at their behest, business survival be damned. The reality is that these people aren't going to be hiring for a long . . . LONG time, economic recovery notwithstanding. Not even a smidgen. I really wish they would, but you know what they say about wishing with one hand and crapping into another.

I just thought of something else. The 2.5 million jobs figure for infrastructure and other industries mostly takes care of construction workers, builders and trades. What about the millions of manufacturing jobs that have been lost to offshoring, plant closings or movement or white collar jobs by the millions that have fallen victim to mass firings from quarterly-profit-minded greedbags mentioned above? I mean, realistically, is an ex-systems analyst or marketing director gonna strap on the hard hat and build them some bridges or repair schools? When do their jobs come back?

And anyone who doesn't think replacing a 50-70 thousand a year job with a service job that makes 1/2 to 1/3 as much (if they even do) isn't a problem for your economy, think again. Long term unemployment and underemployment represent lost tax revenue and further drains on the already looted treasury. It's also going to lead to more criminal activity, sorry to say; people who have no options feel they will have no choice. White-collar-hate all you want; we're ALL in the same boat. Unemployed is unemployed, no matter where you're from.

Yeah, good luck paying for industry creation when you're top tax rate is 35% until 2010 and you still have 10-billion-a-month bloodbaths going on overseas.

Removing the cancer of Friedman economics is going to be the greatest challenge this nation will face. Of course, that requires convincing people like John Thain, a multi-millionaire who feels he deserves a 10 million dollar bonus after running Merril into the ground, to do a complete 180 in mindset and morals. These people love money, not Country. These people look out for #1. To paraphrase Michael Moore, these people live in a land of "ME", not a land of "WE".

That's the problem.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
42. I think we need something like the CCC...
The Civilian Conservation Corps. Roosevelt put the young folks to work building trails and cleaning up the environment. Most likely, the biggest proportion of unemployed will probably be the youngest workers. They will spend this money and help the economy from the bottom up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC