How to get Jobs going in this country

[raderag]

The solution by Liberals has been to spend more money on anything, and conservatives by reducing taxes and regulation. Here is the kind of ideas I think we really need, which include both things, but are targeted towards long term development.



Fareed's Take: Obama should declare a jobs emergency (http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/02/fareeds-take-obama-should-declare-a-jobs-emergency/)
By Fareed Zakaria, CNN
America's jobs crisis persists and there often seems to be little we can do about it. But there is one area where government can create jobs - even if consumers aren't spending and businesses aren't hiring - and in a way that is productive for long-term growth: Rebuilding America. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates (http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/) that America's crumbling infrastructure needs $2 trillion worth of repairs, upgrades and expansions. With needs on that scale, President Obama's infrastructure proposals are at 1/20 the size of the problem. We need a big plan and a grand bargain between left and right to get it.
The first element of the bargain would be funding. Already, there are several good proposals for infrastructure banks. Relatively small public investments can be leveraged to attract much larger sums of private capital. Compared with other nations, the United States has astonishingly little private-sector involvement in the building of infrastructure such as roads, bridges and highways. With interest rates at historic lows, borrowing $200 billion by issuing 30 or 50 year bonds to rebuild America would add just a few billion a year to the deficit.

Then you need to actually build it. Obama said he was surprised that there are so few shovel-ready projects. Well, the regulations, reviews and permits required to approve infrastructure ensures that any major project takes years, often decades, to be shovel-ready. In fact, one study (http://www.freshfields.com/industries/reports/outlook_for_infrastructure_2009/) of a set of infrastructure projects found that, of all countries examined, the United States has the highest proportion of projects stuck at the "pre-approval stage (http://www.freshfields.com/industries/reports/outlook_for_infrastructure_2009/)" - announced but still 3 to 10 years from construction. This is more than 3.5 times the number of such projects, by value, in Europe.

President Obama should announce a national jobs emergency. Infrastructure projects listed under this rubric should be fast-tracked through the environmental review process, with approvals granted within 60 days. Additionally, the requirement that people have to be paid union wages should be suspended, so that skilled and unskilled workers can be hired. In return for these exemptions, Democrats should seek $200 billion in capital for the new infrastructure banks, which could easily attract private capital of hundreds of billions within weeks.

There is really no debate about the need to invest in America's infrastructure. The conservative-leaning Center for Strategic and International Studies issued a report in 2006 (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/060327_infrastructure_principles.pdf) noting that U.S. productivity and living standards were declining as a consequence of neglect. It urged federal involvement and investment, pointing out that "creating infrastructure assets with long-lived benefits should not be determined by short-term cash availability." It also noted: "Federal deficits sap our economic growth, and must inevitably be paid. But failing to support long-term growth could prove even more vexing.... By whatever means, it is imperative that we make new investments."

Of the 2012 presidential candidates, just one was a signatory to that report on "Guiding Principles for Strengthening America's Infrastructure (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/060327_infrastructure_principles.pdf)." So, I look forward to hearing a full-throated case for infrastructure spending during the campaign from that person: Rick Perry.

For more of my thoughts throughout the week, I invite you to follow me on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/fareedzakaria) and Twitter (http://twitter.com/#%21/fareedzakaria) and to visit the Global Public Square (http://www.cnn.com/gps) every day. Also, for more of my takes, click here (http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/category/fareeds-take/).

[Tallen]

Sounds good. One of the things that is inherent in those ideas is the dismantling of many of the government agencies that stand in the way of such things. So much of the money that could be used to rebuild is spent on bureaucracies that are involved where there is no need for them. I see it often in the business I am in.

[tking]

Our governor just passed a bill to add more bridges to the building budget this year. She sounds like she might be on the same page as this article. Oklahoma is one of the absolute worst in the country as far as infrastructure goes, so maybe we're on the right track.

[raderag]

Sounds good. One of the things that is inherent in those ideas is the dismantling of many of the government agencies that stand in the way of such things. So much of the money that could be used to rebuild is spent on bureaucracies that are involved where there is no need for them. I see it often in the business I am in.

That is right, but we have to figure out how to remove the unnecessary bureaucracy without getting rid of legitimate oversight. Good leadership would be a start, and the POTUS appointing good people rather than cronies would really help.

[raderag]

Our governor just passed a bill to add more bridges to the building budget this year. She sounds like she might be on the same page as this article. Oklahoma is one of the absolute worst in the country as far as infrastructure goes, so maybe we're on the right track.

Yah, but its heads and above New Mexico, Arkansas, and Louisiana, which are all very close by. Texas used to be one of the best, but it is worsening.

[Tallen]

That is right, but we have to figure out how to remove the unnecessary bureaucracy without getting rid of legitimate oversight. Good leadership would be a start, and the POTUS appointing good people rather than cronies would really help.

Agreed. I also think that is true at the state level, as well. State bureaucracies are a real problem for business, a lot of the time. For instance, a very needed airport replacement here in our area was halted for years and years and years because someone in a state level bureaucracy didn't want to disturb Indiana Bats, an endangered species in the area. We are finally going to get the airport, but it is after years, which has hurt our economy very badly. Other towns along in the area have brought in jobs and business, but our area has steadily been declining because of policies enforced like the one mentioned. The bats, btw, are not impacted by the airport at all.

[raderag]

Agreed. I also think that is true at the state level, as well. State bureaucracies are a real problem for business, a lot of the time. For instance, a very needed airport replacement here in our area was halted for years and years and years because someone in a state level bureaucracy didn't want to disturb Indiana Bats, an endangered species in the area. We are finally going to get the airport, but it is after years, which has hurt our economy very badly. Other towns along in the area have brought in jobs and business, but our area has steadily been declining because of policies enforced like the one mentioned. The bats, btw, are not impacted by the airport at all.

Regulations and bureaucracy are unfortunately, a necessary evil. We have clean air and water in this country not because corporations voluntarily pollute less, but because of regulations. OTOH, less oversight is needed when industry standards are adopted. For example, the pharma industry, while heavily regulated, does not have all that much oversight as companies tend to police themselves and others on this. Its all about the culture in the industry and specific company.

[Tallen]

Regulations and bureaucracy are unfortunately, a necessary evil. We have clean air and water in this country not because corporations voluntarily pollute less, but because of regulations.

I agree and disagree with this. I think we are moving toward better policies, not because it is necessarily regulated..., but because of lawsuits. Companies seem to fear lawsuits more than regulation.


OTOH, less oversight is needed when industry standards are adopted. For example, the pharma industry, while heavily regulated, does not have all that much oversight as companies tend to police themselves and others on this. Its all about the culture in the industry and specific company.

Yep, agreed.

[raderag]

I agree and disagree with this. I think we are moving toward better policies, not because it is necessarily regulated..., but because of lawsuits. Companies seem to fear lawsuits more than regulation.



Yep, agreed.




Which brings up a revealing irony. The argument from many pro-business conservatives today is that we need less regulation, and that the courts are a better recourse than government bureaucracy. While wanting to gut regulations, they also want to have certain "tort reforms" that would make it much more onerous to take these issues to court. They even want to remove or severely reduce "punitive damages" which are there to prevent companies from doing evil based on a cold financial calculation. Its got to be balanced.

These are the kinds of shifts of power that I think conservatives should be wary of.

[Tallen]

Which brings up a revealing irony. The argument from many pro-business conservatives today is that we need less regulation, and that the courts are a better recourse than government bureaucracy. While wanting to gut regulations, they also want to have certain "tort reforms" that would make it much more onerous to take these issues to court. They even want to remove or severely reduce "punitive damages" which are there to prevent companies from doing evil based on a cold financial calculation. Its got to be balanced.

These are the kinds of shifts of power that I think conservatives should be wary of.

Yes, it has to be balanced, I agree. I also agree that these are the kinds of issues that conservatives should be wary of. What does "tort reform" mean anyway? It's another way to say protect me from having responsibilities that will result in making me pay money. Be responsible, avoid paying money. And the balance to that is of coarse, kick out frivolous lawsuits. Which is harder than what we first think when we look at that issue.

[Tallen]

Our governor just passed a bill to add more bridges to the building budget this year. She sounds like she might be on the same page as this article. Oklahoma is one of the absolute worst in the country as far as infrastructure goes, so maybe we're on the right track.

I hate driving OK's highways..., it will tear a car up. It seems there is a bump every 10 feet. :L28:

[raderag]

Yes, it has to be balanced, I agree. I also agree that these are the kinds of issues that conservatives should be wary of. What does "tort reform" mean anyway? It's another way to say protect me from having responsibilities that will result in making me pay money. Be responsible, avoid paying money. And the balance to that is of coarse, kick out frivolous lawsuits. Which is harder than what we first think when we look at that issue.

"Tort reform" is lawsuit reform; in Texas they have severly removed punitive damages even when companies/people are sorely and grossly negligent. In addition, some have tried to push a looser pays system. if you loose the lawsuit, you pay not only legal fees, but the damages you were suing for.

If we have all that, we need a fairly strong regulatory system, but those that push for it want to gut both the courts and the regulatory agencies.

[Tallen]

...in Texas they have severly removed punitive damages even when companies/people are sorely and grossly negligent.

I guess maybe that is fueled by the idea that companies aren't the people running them.


In addition, some have tried to push a looser pays system. if you loose the lawsuit, you pay not only legal fees, but the damages you were suing for.

I have mixed feeling about this one.

[Tallen]

if you loose the lawsuit, you pay not only legal fees, but the damages you were suing for.

Just a thought on this, maybe having a lawyer responsible in this as well. If the lawyer looses he is responsible for the legal fee and the damages as well. :L27:

[raderag]

Just a thought on this, maybe having a lawyer responsible in this as well. If the lawyer looses he is responsible for the legal fee and the damages as well. :L27:

Then who would you find to represent you?

BTW, I'm fine with tort reform. Most European countries have much stricter tort laws, but they also have stronger regulatory bodies.

[Tallen]

Then who would you find to represent you?

Lawyers with moral direction. It would stop frivolous lawsuits if lawyers were accountable for them, in some kind of fashion. Why allow any lawyer to make any kind of lawsuit he wants? He can benefit from it either way.


BTW, I'm fine with tort reform. Most European countries have much stricter tort laws, but they also have stronger regulatory bodies.

I'm not sure. I'm rather ignorant of European judicial processes.

[turtlegs]

The solution by Liberals has been to spend more money on anything, and conservatives by reducing taxes and regulation. Here is the kind of ideas I think we really need, which include both things, but are targeted towards long term development.

Here's how I've been thinking about it. If Americans are out of work because they lost their jobs... why create new ones? Do what it takes to get their old jobs back. Wouldn't that solve the jobs problem, rehire a workforce already trained to do their job?

[turtlegs]

I hate driving OK's highways..., it will tear a car up. It seems there is a bump every 10 feet. :L28:

Didn't use to always be that way... but here in NC... smooth, no country dirt roads, you just have to tolerate the rude drivers...

[Tallen]

Didn't use to always be that way... but here in NC... smooth, no country dirt roads, you just have to tolerate the rude drivers...

NC does seem to always have good roads.

[raderag]

Here's how I've been thinking about it. If Americans are out of work because they lost their jobs... why create new ones? Do what it takes to get their old jobs back. Wouldn't that solve the jobs problem, rehire a workforce already trained to do their job?

IN many cases, the old jobs are not needed in our economy. IOW, it would be unproductive.

[Tallen]

IN many cases, the old jobs are not needed in our economy. IOW, it would be unproductive.

Doesn't matter, the government is paying for them. Instead of paying unemployment, have them go to their jobs and sit there until their needed. Employment Benefits. That's how the Chineese do it.

[raderag]

Doesn't matter, the government is paying for them. Instead of paying unemployment, have them go to their jobs and sit there until their needed. Employment Benefits. That's how the Chineese do it.

Too many perverse incentives on both sides. With unemployment insurance, there is incentive to find a job since it is only a percentage of total paycheck, and since it is supposed to be temporary.

[Tallen]

Too many perverse incentives on both sides. With unemployment insurance, there is incentive to find a job since it is only a percentage of total paycheck, and since it is supposed to be temporary.

Doesn't matter. Pay them what you would pay them in unemployment benefits. The incentive would be to get another job that pays more. The main point is that we should give everyone a job, and have the government pay them, everyone. No Employee Left Behind, could be the slogan. We should also provide housing for everyone, to. And a car and cell phone and Internet access with a new computer. And lets not forget the right to a clean pair of underwear each and every day. After all..., we're raised taught that is important. Every mother tell their child that in America. Wouldn't want to go to the hospital with dirty underwear. And bottled water. Don't forget about that. Everyone should be drinking bottled water, It's clean and helps the Bush family buy up water rights around the world. They should be able to profit from that and charge us more per gallon of water than we pay for gas.

These are rights.

[raderag]

Doesn't matter. Pay them what you would pay them in unemployment benefits. The incentive would be to get another job that pays more. The main point is that we should give everyone a job, and have the government pay them, everyone. No Employee Left Behind, could be the slogan. We should also provide housing for everyone, to. And a car and cell phone and Internet access with a new computer. And lets not forget the right to a clean pair of underwear each and every day. After all..., we're raised taught that is important. Every mother tell their child that in America. Wouldn't want to go to the hospital with dirty underwear. And bottled water. Don't forget about that. Everyone should be drinking bottled water, It's clean and helps the Bush family buy up water rights around the world. They should be able to profit from that and charge us more per gallon of water than we pay for gas.

These are rights.


LOL. Thanks, I needed the chuckle. See, I thought you were serious at first.

DId you read the Wall Street Protesters demands? One of them was a $20 min wage, even if you don't have a job.

[Tallen]

LOL. Thanks, I needed the chuckle. See, I thought you were serious at first.

DId you read the Wall Street Protesters demands? One of them was a $20 min wage, even if you don't have a job.

Sounds good to me..., I can retire on that. :L22:

This whole Wall Street Protest seems to be a joke to me. Isn't the point of America to make your way? Be innovative and creative. These folks would be better off if they put their energy to work on creating their own jobs and thinking of innovations that work in this economy. Afterall..., if gas prices go to $10 a gallon, someone needs to be making bicycles. And if food prices skyrocket, someone has to be making fishing poles. And if housing isn't avaiable, we need tent makers. ...kind of thing.

[Yodas_Prodigy]

On a more pragmatic note, I think the long-term unemployed should be going to school to further their skills while on unemployment...

[Tallen]

On a more pragmatic note, I think the long-term unemployed should be going to school to further their skills while on unemployment...

What about a guy that is 60 years old? Educating him to retire in a couple of years is not something we should be doing, is it?

[Yodas_Prodigy]

Exceptions to every rule...

[Tallen]

Exceptions to every rule...

But what should they do with the exceptions?

BTW, I like the Unemployment Insurance program, but I don't think we should extend it to far.

[raderag]

But what should they do with the exceptions?

BTW, I like the Unemployment Insurance program, but I don't think we should extend it to far.

Well, the university systems are 75% government subsidized, so I don't see the problem with providing job training.

[Tallen]

Well, the university systems are 75% government subsidized, so I don't see the problem with providing job training.

Well that's a good point. So should they get more subsidizing from the unemployment benefits?

[raderag]

Well that's a good point. So should they get more subsidizing from the unemployment benefits?


I don't know exactly how or when, but it seems like our entire economy would do better when our workers are well trained.

[Tallen]

I don't know exactly how or when, but it seems like our entire economy would do better when our workers are well trained.

If that was true, we should have the best economy ever, right now. There has never been a time in our history when people have been better educated and trained. Shouldn't we?

[raderag]

If that was true, we should have the best economy ever, right now. There has never been a time in our history when people have been better educated and trained. Shouldn't we?

I disagree, we have too few skilled workers.

[Tallen]

I don't know exactly how or when, but it seems like our entire economy would do better when our workers are well trained.


I disagree, we have too few skilled workers.

Aren't you moving the goal post here, Bret? Your comment was about training, not skill. Today there is offered more training to employees than has ever been offered. Yet we are suffereing from unskilled people and a poor economy.

[raderag]

What about a guy that is 60 years old? Educating him to retire in a couple of years is not something we should be doing, is it?

60 is the new 50, and many 60 year olds will work for 10 more years.

[raderag]

Aren't you moving the goal post here, Bret? Your comment was about training, not skill. Today there is offered more training to employees than has ever been offered. Yet we are suffereing from unskilled people and a poor economy.

It takes training to move a goalpost. :-)


But is it the right kind of training? Also, I am not saying that training alone or even primarily is our economic problem.

[Tallen]

60 is the new 50, and many 60 year olds will work for 10 more years.

I'm one of them.

[raderag]

I'm one of them.

You probably stink at golf anyway. :-)

[Tallen]

I do, except on the Wii. I'm pretty good there but my kids beat me all the time.