Employers Say Jobs Plan Won't Lead to Hiring Spur

reply to post by diddlydo

The temporary jobs will hopefully spur growth as I said above. If there is some economic growth businesses hopefully would create permanent jobs. So as the temp. jobs start to dry up the permanent jobs would fill in for those losses leading to a net gain in the end.

The problem, however, is that a government contract is a service job - not a producing job. A producer makes and exchanges something of value - the profits of which he uses to pay for other products and services.

A service employee simply does something on behalf of a customer. The service industry is incapable of driving the service industry. The growth generated by temporary government positions will evaporate quickly following the termination of those contracts. Fewer customers at a restaurant means less staff. Fewer people purchasing clothing means fewer store clerks and textile manufacturers (though we don't make much of that here, anyway...).

The point is that much of the growth will be entirely dependent upon continued government funding.

reply to post by Aim64C

Exactly right. Government already has to either borrow more money or raise taxes to pay for the jobs such infrastructure will create. So, we lose there either way. Then, just as soon as government stops spending that money, those jobs evaporate. Government spending cannot "fix" the economy.

reply to post by whaaa


Glad to hear your biz is growing. Mine has too. No thanks to the amount of money the Government has poured into things with the stimulus. The stimulus didn't effect the economy or the average American enough, considering how much money was spend. TARP? It's looks like Bank of America still will go under....what did we spend all that money on? I don't know about other parts of the country, but I have had my fill of road construction. It was going on before the stimulus and will continue after the stimulus.

The infrastructure we should have been working on all this time is biofuels and city-wide wifi. Those two things will spur job/business growth. I'm sorry but road and bridge repair work, while necessary, don't create sustainable jobs nor spur other businesses to hire more. I'm not hiring more staff because a road next to me that really didn't seem to need repaving, got repaved. Most of the initial stimulus money was squandered. Some things that really helped people (ie. energy efficiency tax credits) went away. I really doubt Washington can or will solve our problems.....it's up to us to do it in spite of Washington.

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by whaaa

 

I really doubt Washington can or will solve our problems.....it's up to us to do it in spite of Washington.

That is how I feel, that we are seeing success not because of Washington but in-spite of it. I dont mean that they are coming around and knocking papers off our desks like michael scott. But rather that Washington sets the mood and between the horrendous spending and an executive branch that has no executive skills and a legislature that wants its cake and to eat it too, the best thing the fed govt can do is just slowly (not to slowly) diminish its size and backtrack on many regulations and laws.

But good luck getting someone/something to relinquish power.

It's hypocritical for obama to even talk about jobs for american when last month he gave amnesty to 30 milllion illegals and told them to apply for work permits!!!

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45
It's hypocritical for obama to even talk about jobs for american when last month he gave amnesty to 30 milllion illegals and told them to apply for work permits!!!

Oh you mean that most transparent and immoral election season politics? Now he can count on the Latino Vote (I know not all latinos are illegal and not all illegals are latino but I am confident most illegals are latino/hispanic) . But hey he did say he would bring transparency to the white house.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Jobs plan. Give me a break. The government doesn't need a jobs plan, it needs a get the hell out of the way plan. If anything, remove the uncertainty of what cumbersome legislation is about to hit next. Companies don't hire to provide jobs. Companies hire because they need employees.

And they don't need employees in a period of "negative growth", or massive uncertainty.

As long as we have the majority in Washington who believe government is the answer, we're doomed. Government is a ponderous, fat hog of a burden which does nothing but get in the way. You chowderheads in DC figure out how to regulate Wall Street in a fashion where they're not screwing everyone, while a big golden parachute guarantee waits at the end when they get caught, then come out and try to micromanage everything else. Clowns can't even get the core mission right, and they want to tinker with everything else.

A guy can't open a flippin' doughnut shop and hire a couple of people without jumping over some impossibly high, ridiculously expensive regulatory hurdles, while the Wall Streeters fleece us all with impunity.

Jobs plan. >snort< How about, simplify the tax code and audit the Fed? For starters.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

edit on 9/14/2011 by yeahright because: (no reason given)

Government can have a regulatory purpose. In addition to teaching, I work in a government agency that oversees petroleum/mineral development to make sure they're not trenching through Native American burial grounds (big lawsuit later) or bulldozing historic buildings (general populace outrage/political fallout later). We very, very, very, very rarely have to hold up or force projects/development to be modified (maybe 1 in 50,000 projects), but the fact that we're there checking over the proposals keeps companies from doing bad things. The cost to the companies is, overall, negligible, and we don't cost taxpayers a whole lot, either, but we save a lot of hassle down the road. The laws in place that created our agency were passed because these companies were generally running amok and people got tired of it.

So, advocating that government just 'get the hell out of the way' might sound like a pretty good idea, but it's only a good idea until an oil company decides to trench in a pipeline through your family's house (actually happened to a guy I know....he spent over $50k fighting it because there wasn't government oversight to make the company give a crap). However, I also believe that there is a lot of regulatory failure that goes on that could be eliminated, and regulations that should be strictly enforced (Wall St, for example).