What are your ideas on how to stimulate job growth?

[Ted King]

Clearly we need to do something to stimulate more job growth. Except for those ideologues who think that cutting government spending and throwing many thousands of federal employees out of work will lead to job growth, most everyone else realizes that the deficit reduction isn't a means of improving job growth - certainly at least not in the near term which is the most pressing need. So, what can be done?

I'd like to devote this thread to sharing ideas about what can be done to increase job growth - and this is the an important bit - BUT NOT REQUIRE MUCH OF ANY EXTRA SPENDING BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT mostly because it's pretty clear that the Republicans in Congress aren't going to allow it.

My idea tries to get around a problem with banks being reluctant to give out loans to small businesses. Here's my suggestion - have an appropriate federal agency set up a loan guarantee program that federally insures loans to small businesses that are assessed to be quite likely to survive and pay back the loans but are having trouble getting financing. Hopefully, that would shake loose some more money from the banks because they know that with a federal guarantee that there would be zero risk in giving the loan. Since it would require some government manpower to run (though it might require only a small expansion in the Small Business Administration) and some of the loans would default, there would be some government spending involved. I don't imagine that such a program would have a big impact on unemployment but if it helped a little bit then it's better than nothing. And if we can cobble together a bunch of ideas with each one having a little beneficial effect, then the whole bunch might actually make a significant difference.

I've focused on what the government can do, but I don't intend this thread to be focused only on what government can do. I am, though, looking for ideas that are likely to produce more job growth in the near term - the next year or so.

[RgrF]

Well we have a rapidly aging population bubble, the health industry is building retirement homes and pharmacies like crazy but with the drive to cut back benefits it might seem that for those looking in the lower rungs of the labor market that grave digging would be a job in constant demand for the foreseeable future.

We might even pass local statutes that forbid the use of mechanized backhoes and such. Get them off the driveways at Home Depot and Lowes.

[JPK]

I may not have the answers, but I know what are not the answers. Putting more lifetime government jobs in play is NOT the answer.

In my industry, financing for construction projects is still very tight. The backlog of infrastructure is enough to jar the economy back on track if the financing become more available.

That's 1 idea.

Keep the list going! It seems like the politicians are not interested in exploring the answers, lets make this an MR Grassroots project to save the economy!

JPK

[cbelt3]

#1: Government can get the heck out of the way of business. The interlocking maze of red tape to get almost anything started is overwhelming, and expensive. Every time government says "I'm going to protect you from.." they mean "I'm going to cost you a ton of money and blame you for ..."

I don't mean kill reasonable health and safety regulations, but just reduce the complexity to a reasonable level ? It's crazy.. you have to hire expensive consultants and lawyers who can work through the maze.

#2: Banks can use #1 to relax and start loaning money to businesses, especially small businesses, to allow them to expand.

#3: Educate the workforce. My company spends WAY more than it ever used to educating our workforce. Why ? Because the kids out of high school are too undereducated and unprepared for a the modern manufacturing environment. We should *not* have to teach basic math (Addition ! Subtraction ! Division !) and English Composition skills to High School graduates.

[$tevie]

Let's face it, a good old-fashioned World War could fix it right up. We just need to convince all the countries to fight using 1940s technology.

[Mac1337]

Wondering how jobs are created on an Apple forum by lifelong Apple users shows we haven't learned a thing about how a business becomes successful. Obama should surround himself with successful CEOs and ask them what to do for a change. What does he do on a daily basis? Go to the podium and bash corporate jet owners and millionaires and billionaires.

[MacArtist]

We've lost so many manufacturing/assembly jobs.

Used to be opportunities for people without college education to be able to make a decent living.

Things are so messed up that people with degrees can't find jobs in their field. They end up taking management jobs in fast food restaurants.

Teenagers are having problems finding jobs because retired people have re-entered the workforce to try and make ends meet.

Only thing left is WalMart.

There are no easy answers. Just harsh realities.

[Ted King]

cbelt3 wrote:
#1: Government can get the heck out of the way of business. The interlocking maze of red tape to get almost anything started is overwhelming, and expensive. Every time government says "I'm going to protect you from.." they mean "I'm going to cost you a ton of money and blame you for ..."

I don't mean kill reasonable health and safety regulations, but just reduce the complexity to a reasonable level ? It's crazy.. you have to hire expensive consultants and lawyers who can work through the maze.

#2: Banks can use #1 to relax and start loaning money to businesses, especially small businesses, to allow them to expand.

#3: Educate the workforce. My company spends WAY more than it ever used to educating our workforce. Why ? Because the kids out of high school are too undereducated and unprepared for a the modern manufacturing environment. We should *not* have to teach basic math (Addition ! Subtraction ! Division !) and English Composition skills to High School graduates.

I agree that doing #1 has potential to stimulate a fair amount of job growth but my concern is that it could easily slip into a "China Syndrome" sort of thing - not as a nuclear meltdown but as in modern China with its stunning economic growth but growth that comes at great cost to consumer and worker safety and the environment. And any time Congress starts working on reducing regulation, lobbyists for big corporations hijack the process as much as they can to benefit their particular concerns.

But such a thing might be grounds for a compromise that liberals could live with - reduction in some "red tape" IF the regulations that remain have a lot more teeth to them and come with greater consumer protection. I mean that we do away with meaningless small fines that businesses for breaking the rules too often and just pay it off as a cost of doing business and replace them with consequences with a real bite. They break an important rule (which should be the rules that are left when we reduce red tape) and they pay dearly for it so that they are severely disinclined to do so in the first place or in the future. And stronger consumer protections can go a long way toward mitigating bad things businesses do that cause economic, emotional or physical harm to consumers. I should add, though, that I don't think liberals are going to agree to very much deregulation of business that is related to worker safety, so to the degree that some may feel those regulations are overly burdensome on business, I don't think there is a lot of room for compromise on that with liberals.

How do you suggest accomplishing #3 without increasing government expenditures?

[haikuman]

Simple bring manufacturing back to the USA... Balance the differences between Unions and Business.

More Business's should have ESOP programs, building loyalty and quality products simultaneously.

Make Business in the USA user friendly.

Make Congress work 50 weeks a year *(:>*:thumbsup: :devil: and earn their money

Rudie

[Grace62]

Let's face it - the majority in Congress right now does not care about the economic well-being of our country. They mostly spend their time talking with and listening to wealthy donors, whose primary focus is paying as little in taxes as possible, and reducing regulation. Neither of those goals is in the interest of the country as a whole, they benefit a very small minority. In addition, as the economy has become more global, banks and corporations are less interested in the well-being of our country and more in how they can win on a global scale. They also have a very disproportional voice in Congress. US-based corporations "winning" used to be good for our country because they made and spent their money here and paid taxes - no more.

There is also an entire branch of a political party that has been conned into voting against their own interest, and that group is well represented in Congress right now.

There's not much the average person can do to stimulate the economy, so I don't see the point of making the premise "government can't do anything." You can't force companies to hire here and invest here and you can't force banks to lend. Forget that.

What the average person needs to do in order to stimulate the economy, and thereby create jobs, is get involved with politics. At least get to know the candidates and bother to vote. Studying a little economics wouldn't hurt either, and I don't mean the AM radio edition.