Tag(s): ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Funny 1   View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Primary Headline on 6/11/11:     Permalink
View Article Stats      (15 comments)

If the President Won't Do Something About Jobs, Who Will?

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (9 fans)   -- Page 1 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com

When it comes to jobs, sometimes it seems as if the White House is from Mars and the middle class is from Venus. And Republicans act like they're from the Death Star, patrolling the economy in their Imperial Cruisers directing laser blasts at every job initiative they can find.

The resulting political paralysis has left millions of Americans trapped in geographical or demographic pockets of full-blown depression. Unlike Wall Street's America, theirs is a bleak economic landscape from which there seems to be no escape.

The administration's mishandling of jobs has become a Rorschach test for those who understand that more needs to be done. Is the White House following a misguided political strategy, thinking people want lower deficits more than they want jobs? Has it been "captured" by the conservative thinking of ex-Republican Tim Geithner? Are the president and his advisors too reluctant to propose measures they know will fail in the Republican House because they want success stories?

Ask anyone these questions and the answers will tell you a lot about them, but very little about the White House (unless they have inside information, of course.) But the answers doesn't really matter. The president's staunchest supporters and his harshest liberal critics have the same work cut out for them.

St. Louis Blues

Sometimes I'd rather hammer nails into my skull than look at the latest job figures. But my toolbox is in the garage and it's raining, so here I am reading some new reports from the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank. We already know about our ongoing and staggeringly high overall unemployment. We know about sky-high youth and minority joblessness and record levels of long-term un- and under-employment.

Now, thanks to the St. Louis Fed's data, we also know that we lost more than one million retail jobs between 2007 and 2009. That's the result of lost demand, which in turn comes from joblessness, fewer working hours for people with jobs, and a lot more money tied up in real estate than it's worth. The St. Louis numbers also show that the average number of hours worked declined by nearly an hour per week.

As the states shed jobs, we need between 300,000 and 400,000 new jobs each month to make up for unemployment and for young people and others entering the work force. The number of new private-sector jobs last month was 38,000. The government needs to put people back to work, and quickly.

Friendly Fire

A lot of people think the White House wants to spend more to create jobs, but doesn't want to propose anything that won't make it through John Boehner's House. That argument was undercut by the administration's actions this week. Democrats in the Senate proposed an additional $600 million in public works spending over a three year period. That's a very small number -- our Citizens' Commission on Jobs and the Deficit recommended much more investment in jobs and growth, as did the EPI and others -- but it's a move in the right direction.

Predictably, Republican Jim DeMint attacked the measure as "another failed job stimulus" idea -- a line of attack that's only made possible because the White House chose to ask for less stimulus money in 2009 than was actually needed, rather than let Republicans shoot down the right number. That approach would have allowed Democrats to explain clearly why the economy's still stagnant.

It's also exactly the approach Harry Reid was using when he labeled the Republican House a "big black hole" from which nothing escapes except "their ideas on how to kill Medicare." At last! Finally, a Democratic strategy for underscoring the difference between Democrats and Republicans and the need to invest in job creation.

How did the White House respond? "White House says Senate Dems' jobs bill is too expensive," read the headline in The Hill. "...(T)he bill would authorize spending levels higher than those requested by the president's Budget,: the Administration wrote, "and the administration believes that the need for smart investments that help America win the future must be balanced with the need to control spending and reduce the deficit."

Aaaargggh.

Instead of explaining that we spent too little on stimulus rather than too much, the president and his advisors have allowed Jim DeMint's assertion to go unchallenged. Added DeMint, "We've already wasted hundreds of billions of tax dollars on a misguided stimulus that left us with record high unemployment, and we don't need to repeat the mistake."

Come together... over jobs

Whatever his reasons, we now know that president isn't about to use his "bully pulpit" to contradict Republicans like DeMint. So if the White House won't step up to the plate, who will? Somebody needs to take action. To paraphrase Al Franken, why not you?

Public pressure has persuaded the White House to change course before. In the run-up to the president's State of the Union address, advanced reports said he planned to announce Social Security cuts. A lot of people raised the alarm, call-ins and other actions were organized, and in the end no cuts were announced.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Richard (RJ) Eskow is a former executive with experience in health care, benefits, and risk management, finance, and information technology. Richard worked for AIG and other insurance, risk management, and financial organizations. He was also a (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
15 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

If the government could actually control the economy . . . by Dana Pico on Saturday, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:17:39 PM
Do you have a purchase order for that buy in? by John Sanchez Jr. on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 2:40:29 PM
So very right you are by BFalcon on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 9:22:54 PM
Actually..... by Jeff Poster on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 6:41:56 PM
one other thing... by Jeff Poster on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 7:00:23 PM
The stimulus of 2008/09 by bogi666 on Monday, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:27:50 AM
A tale of three Presidents by Perry Logan on Monday, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:20:24 PM
Erratum by Perry Logan on Monday, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:23:20 PM
Alien authors by GUY P. FRASER on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:50:14 AM
Dammed if we do and If we don't. by David Chester on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:04:36 PM
Recipe by John Smith on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:13:51 PM
Excuse me for demanding the politicians do their job. by Jeff Poster on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:00:07 PM
Obama (ie government) can't create jobs by Ken Scott on Sunday, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:16:42 PM
Well, darn... by David Kendall on Monday, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:07:39 AM
So the government chooses to ... by Philip Pease on Monday, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:40:46 AM