U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-05-2015, 08:26 AM
 
Location: NH
820 posts, read 801,145 times
Reputation: 1023

Advertisements

Should the govt. be in the business of 'creating jobs' for the population? Does it work for the long term?

What are some good examples of the govt creating jobs that have had long term success?

Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2015, 10:32 AM
 
11,638 posts, read 5,926,812 times
Reputation: 1695
Built the things in the 30s, but so well, there were no continuous maintenance jobs.

Many consider me a troll, but I like to consider myself a free lance bridge inspector.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
6,942 posts, read 7,773,903 times
Reputation: 5694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Know Nonsense View Post
Should the govt. be in the business of 'creating jobs' for the population? Does it work for the long term?

What are some good examples of the govt creating jobs that have had long term success?

Thanks
The government should not be in the business of creating jobs, ever. The only thing which the government should be responsible for is creating an environment where job creation is not only possible but easily achievable. This means less taxation, less regulation, and less demonizing of the "rich". Unfortunately, we aren't likely to see such an environment again in the near future, as the hatred of successful business owners seems to have become an ingrained attitude among the majority of the voting public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 01:07 PM
 
5,532 posts, read 5,973,116 times
Reputation: 3155
Creating jobs directly and indirectly is the perhaps government's most important duty. So much (education, healthcare, housing, the economy) depends on it.
There could be programs put in place where private employers can get employees with their salaries paid by the government in lieu of unemployment. There could be public corporations started by government and later privatized. Anything but letting people stay out of work, without ccupation and means of existence. The stability of the country depends on that. That will also be a huge help for the unemployed to be capable of finding new jobs, since employes usually reject people out of work.
Demo nixing the rich (as the other poster mentions) has nothing to do with that. Taxes also don't play much role in many fields. But with regulations he is right. The burden and difficulty these play in America today is very significant.

Last edited by oberon_1; 04-05-2015 at 01:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,178 posts, read 3,896,258 times
Reputation: 2555
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
The government should not be in the business of creating jobs, ever. The only thing which the government should be responsible for is creating an environment where job creation is not only possible but easily achievable. This means less taxation, less regulation, and less demonizing of the "rich". Unfortunately, we aren't likely to see such an environment again in the near future, as the hatred of successful business owners seems to have become an ingrained attitude among the majority of the voting public.
I agree, for the most part.

Government exists for the purpose of leveling the free market playing field. Without regulation, the producers will always have the advantage over the consumers. The ideologues will whine and moan and complain, but they are wrong. Without regulation, the sellers, the producers, the employers, will take advantage of the consumers, the buyers, the employees. There should be balance aka a level playing field.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 04:31 PM
 
4,189 posts, read 4,395,853 times
Reputation: 2228
The government has a terrible track record when it comes to creating jobs or "helping the economy". Just look how Hoover and then FDR tried to "help". All we got was a Great Depression. Bush II tried some government "help" and bombed and Obama really has doubled down to failure too. Government has to take the money out of the economy and then tries to spend it wisely but that rarely happens. It's all corruption and more than ever, inept corruptions. Green jobs? Where? build bridges? Really? The new Oakland bridge was imported from China and is cracking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 04:38 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,672,514 times
Reputation: 6288
Depends on what types of jobs are created. If they're for the military industrial complex, forget it. They're not sustainable.

The LA economy, which was the envy of the US for 40 years following WWII, still hasn't fully recovered since the Cold War ended. The defense contracts dried up, and all the direct and indirect jobs went with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 05:01 PM
 
Location: NC
6,991 posts, read 4,956,561 times
Reputation: 7749
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
The government should not be in the business of creating jobs, ever. The only thing which the government should be responsible for is creating an environment where job creation is not only possible but easily achievable. This means less taxation, less regulation, and less demonizing of the "rich". Unfortunately, we aren't likely to see such an environment again in the near future, as the hatred of successful business owners seems to have become an ingrained attitude among the majority of the voting public.
I'd be willing to bet that if you lived on the Gulf Coast after BP Horizon, or in NC after the Duke Coal Ash Spill, or in Alaska after Valdese, or Bopauh India (SP?) after the Union Carbide Incident, or etc etc etc you'd probably be the first in line to sue those companies.

Less taxation and regulations WOULD be good, but unfortunately, there are always a few who would bypass the rules (or common sense) for a quick buck. They ruin it for the rest of us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
6,942 posts, read 7,773,903 times
Reputation: 5694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost View Post
I'd be willing to bet that if you lived on the Gulf Coast after BP Horizon, or in NC after the Duke Coal Ash Spill, or in Alaska after Valdese, or Bopauh India (SP?) after the Union Carbide Incident, or etc etc etc you'd probably be the first in line to sue those companies.

Less taxation and regulations WOULD be good, but unfortunately, there are always a few who would bypass the rules (or common sense) for a quick buck. They ruin it for the rest of us.
At no point did I say that there should be zero regulation, I said that there should be less regulation. Our business environment is filled with bureaucratic red tape, and as someone who used to run a small business I can tell you that a lot of it is wasted paper. What we currently have is an environment which makes it fairly difficult to start a small business, and extremely difficult to go from a small business to a big (aka job creating) business.

ETA: As for taxes, they are also rather onerous for small businesses. There should be a 2-3 year grace period for new small businesses in which they receive either a complete tax break or at the very least a reduced tax burden so that they can focus more of their earnings into growing their business - especially on the sole proprietor level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2015, 05:26 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,193 posts, read 16,617,917 times
Reputation: 8850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Know Nonsense View Post
Should the govt. be in the business of 'creating jobs' for the population? Does it work for the long term?

What are some good examples of the govt creating jobs that have had long term success?

Thanks
The government doesn't create jobs. They only establish policies that allow the economy to flourish, or languish, as it has been for the last 6 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top