Would a Second Stimulus Create Jobs?

Reader Comments
Back to article

The government now thinks on how to keep our wages and store prices down. To temporary prevent inflation. However this is first rule of controlled Socialistic economy. The "tunnel rat" is absolutely right the visa workers help Angle Sam to achieve this goal a lot. When number of visas and visa wages are deregulated. However this is not the main problem. The main problem that due to drastic reduction in number of small businesses on Main Street and within manufacturing sector we do not generate enough available jobs anymore. They all have being opened in China, India, South America, Eastern Europe, Etc. but not here in USA. Same as with uncontrolled low priced imports, blood sucking retail giants, no-need-to-win-wars, and other "tools of Globalization". We all know that there is no such thing as Healthy Global Economy, when multiple governments are existed and when they do not coordinate properly their attempts. How can we build Global Economy, if we have been destroying our economy for the part 30-40 years. Macro Economy has to have rock solid foundation of Healthy Local Micro Economies in each country. We need to start thinking in terms of small business owners in order to restore our system and economy. The bureaucrats have no idea what small businesses needs are. We need to constantly remind them that they have to represent us and watch after corporate giants. All large corporate giants want is more and more power over small businesses. And instead of being large wholesale supplier to them, they become their killers. Let’s start with the bottom of the economic structure, with helping small businesses to come back & start growing again. Let's vote for strict anti-monopolistic policies, regulation of pricing & distribution of imports, regulation of visa jobs. One may say it's not a capitalistic approach to regulate prices and jobs, however it is, when it's done properly & with right purpose of stimulating local manufacturers, resellers, and retailers. Don't we realize yet that we can't help entire world and save it by setting up Chinese-style economy here and turning China into our outsourcing zone. Everything has to have healthy balance. I'm not saying we need to completely close borders to imports of merchandise & labor, however we need to learn how control it in a smart & creative capitalistic way. What I suggest is to spend some of the bailout money on economic advisors with retail experience to help them to figure out the right way of restoring the mass of small businesses and manufacturers.

AC of NY 4:48PM July 19, 2009

During past 10-15 years of "global economic" reform and "free trade" our Feds and financial clans have been successfully working on conversion of our system into monopolistic body with socialistic engine. They wanted to give birth to an ugly mutant and they did it. I call the new system Mastrubism, or you give it your name. It's partly socialism due to high spending on people at the bottom and free huge money for selected by government leading giants/companies in their industries. This reminds me Soviet Union/USSR a lot. We used to have full government control of all industries starting with manufacturing, then distribution to warehouses and ending with large government controlled chains of small and large stores/retailers. That basically what's going on now slowly but surely here in USA. Government taking over large giants by borrowing them fresh printed money which costs government almost nothing. This is hidden type of step-by-step privatization of these formerly privately own chains. This is why government was demolishing our normal capitalistic economy starting from 1970 by almost uncontrolled import of import cars and other products and making local manufacturers go out of business. It started with manufacturers, then professionals such as programmers and engineers in 2000 and up. Then the most deadly hit was introducing and empowering by credits and patronage "small business killer chains" like Walmart, Kmart, HomeDepot, Lowe's, Staples, Target, BestBuy, Sears, Marshals, Liquidator, Ikea, etc. They all say to us "Save More, Live Better" or "More Saving, More Doing". Oh yes! However what they not telling us, that we eventually will close most of our small businesses operated by us, our family members, friends, neighbors, etc. Who will benefit from buying from these stores? Mostly people in need who are on government assistance, people with stable jobs with stable companies, government employees, and similar individuals. If you have more money then you can spend per month you will survive without going to this kind of large stores which are basically working for government now. The goal here is to socialize the retail industry by slowly and surely killing small independent retailers with "price beating"/ "wholesale to public" concepts and tools. Who is wining here? Nobody, but government and its direct investors/clans. What it does to our Capitalism and USA market? It kills it. The first rule of Capitalism is to protect small businesses and local manufacturers from monopolists in their industries. There are has to be no blood sucking giants, if we want to preserve healthy capitalism and its creative spirit. Government was created to protect small businesses from giant monopolies and uncontrolled imports. It failed to do so and sold its soul to clans. Every smart and talented small business owner knows that it's impossible to fight a wholesale to public giant, and most of businesses give up to fight or just not being given new births anymore.

AC of NY 3:54AM July 19, 2009

The Bush Stimulus money went right back to the IRS because my first wife died and I didn't increase my deductions to compensate for this. Then after marrying my second wife, we had income tax money coming back but because my second wife didn't increase her deductions when her honey died and she didn't compensate for his loss; consequently that money was seized by the IRS. Now when the Obama Stimulus for Senior Citizens came through for me (I am 74), that money went for the bills that would have been paid with the money the IRS got.
The point of this discussion and its implication: How did this stimulus money help people get jobs?? and how is this different from the soup lines during the Great Depression? True now we get money to buy soup instead of waiting in line for it. Believe me the @250. came in handy and I am looking forward for the second stimulus so we can have something else besides soup.

Robert L. Matarainen of NY 8:31PM July 18, 2009

She is the most socially, economically, and foreign policy conservative followed by Mitt Romney, and she is the most popular with social, economic , and foreign policy conservatives followed by Mitt Romney. She is an evangelical Christian who is most popular with Evangelical Christians. She is the most attractive, most charismatic, best public speaker, has the best personality, has the best youthful appeal, is the most electrifying (She is the conservative rightwing Republican-Evangelical Christian version of John F. Kennedy) who identifies best with and appeals most to the average American. She is the most personable with the best personal connection and touch, and she draws the largest crowds. Above all she is more like Ronald Reagan in her conservatism and charismatic appeal( esp in speaking ability) than any other rightwing conservative or Republican

John Warren of NJ 11:55AM July 18, 2009

I do not think we need another stimulus bill. What we need is leadership for jobs. The President may be behind on this issue. Jobs is the number 1 issue with people.Long term programs are nice, fine interesting and food for thought. But, not what is on the road in front of the car.Let us encourage private sector jobs with zero tax programs for 3 months.http://drjalee53.blogspot.com/

Jim Lee of IL 11:31AM July 18, 2009

Despite of opposing administration we have today still we should not lose hope. There are people out there that still do their part to make their country better even with the failure of their Political Leaders. People can extend their help by taking initiative, say for example to reduce the number unemployment.
Like the people working hard for http://www.PurchasingCrossing.com, a site which I believe has the most updated information with so many job opportunity offered compare to others, convenient for people looking for occupation.
So I believe each individual has a contribution or responsibility of making the place where they stay a comfortable and healthy home.

Hendrake of WA 10:30AM July 18, 2009

It was a charade for economic recovery. Bill rushed through so no one coulc read and do their due diligence. We ended up with pork to fuel the Democrats to win elections in 2010, 2012, 2014.
How many projects were "shovel ready" that the Dems kept harping on? Not many! No one analyzed how foolhardy these promises were.
Another stimulus will get bogged down in ear marks and payola to unions and others who have clout at the ballot box without regard for what is right for the country.
Mr. Change is giving us the same old brand of political mischief, cronyism, lobbyists (who were former aides to the multi-term Congressmen who are getting big campaign contributions from these bundlers).
Why would we expect a do-over would be any better from this bunch of *&%#?

Ken of WI 5:09PM July 17, 2009

You "GET IT". Aside from stronger labor (unions) which you mentioned, the main thing we had in the good ole days of the 1950s -1960s---that we don't have now---is high income taxes on high incomes including individuals, corporations and capital gains.
"Whoa", says everybody. "Low taxes create jobs". Yes, I know that is the conventional wisdom---but we need to re-think that premise, BECAUSE THERE IS LITTLE TO NO EVIDENCE IT IS TRUE.
Stratifying America into a very small class of mega-rich and a fast-growing large class of people who can barely afford basics HAS MOSTLY DESTROYED OUR MARKETS---AND CREATED OUR DEFICITS IN THE PROCESS.
Not only that, but there is a great and perverse incentive to cut jobs, not create them, when there is no high tax standing by to ameliorate such decisions. In the old pre-Reagan days, many company leaders faced a choice: "We can pay employees, or we can pay very high taxes on the bottom line bump-up we will achieve if we lay them off."
That "choice" is now missing for the most part and executives are rewarded by both their boards AND the tax system for downsizing to the max. How dumb we are about all this!

Muser of NM 5:19PM July 16, 2009

Ma'am,
You write that
"Americans are stumbling through a job market that is overwhelmed with supply, stripped of security, and skimmed of hours and benefits".
This is the other side of the equation that says that the economy is short on demand, which is a result of median family wage deflation over the past 30 years. For an economy that relies 70% on the consumer market, this is a recipe for failure.
And this is a direct result of the marked increase in inequality in the country during the same period. In 1978, the top 1% accounted for 8% of the income in the country. In 2006, they accounted for 21%, nearly 3 times as much, and is the most inequality since, curiously enough, 1928.
Unless measures are taken, both fiscal, and also regulatory, to conteract this trend, I personally doubt that any of the stimulatory measures now being taken will have any lasting effect in the long run.
This is important for ALL of those of us who actually do believe in the capitalist system of free markets. Contrary to anything the "supply-siders" may have said, capitalism relies primarily on a bouyant and prosperous middle class for its markets. Investment decisions by businesses are made much less on the basis of available capital than on the prospect of future profits from this market. And any businessman on "Main Street" will confirm this.
It is no suprise therefore that America's greatest growth occurred during the 50s and 60s of the previous century, during a period of great strength of labor and the middle class. We need to move back to that situation as quickly as possible, if we wish to remain a free-market-based economy.

Jimmy Horowitz of TX 1:52PM July 16, 2009