"It is the death of humanity to know the price of everything but the value of nothing." ~Unknown

Monday, January 31, 2011

Simply Put~ HuffPost Article About Jobs + A Business Owner Explains Simply Who's Responsible For Job Losses

WASHINGTON — Republicans won dozens of elections last fall after claiming Democrats had focused too little on creating jobs. Now GOP lawmakers stand accused of the same charge, using their new House majority to push to repeal the president's health care law, restrict abortions and highlight other social issues important to their most conservative supporters.

Republican leaders say they have a jobs agenda, kicked off by their attempt to unravel what they call the Democrats' "jobs-killing" health overhaul.

Democrats scoff at this notion, and they're hounding Republicans to show how they can put more people to work.
"It's astonishing to me how tone-deaf the Republicans have been in the first weeks of the session," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. "They've talked about everything but jobs."
Few were surprised when House Republicans moved quickly and voted to overturn the law, but the Democratic-controlled Senate will block that effort.
Heads turned when Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, presented the next item on the agenda: writing into law a perennially renewed ban on federal dollars for abortion, and to specify that it applies to health plans.

The abortion proposal "reflects the will of the people," said Boehner. "It's one of our highest legislative priorities."

When reporters asked why jobs weren't the main focus, Boehner said it was vital to vote against the health law because "it's destroying jobs in America."

He and his fellow Republicans say the law could wipe out 650,000 jobs
Democrats dispute that claim. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office put the law's effect on supply and demand for labor as small.

At best, House Republicans seem to be sending mixed or diluted messages about job creation while they promote social issues that appeal to conservative activists. Examples include limiting jury awards in medical malpractice cases and expanding the District of Columbia's school voucher program.
Democrats are pouncing. Each day, they echo the taunt that Republicans used in the November elections: You're not doing enough to create jobs.

"Republicans waging losing war on health care while Democrats focus on jobs," said a headline Friday from the office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. He told reporters that "we still recognize that our number one issue is jobs." He said he was preparing a small-business innovation bill "that would also create jobs."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., sends daily "talking points" to colleagues with suggestions such as "another day, another opportunity lost for Republicans to work with Democrats on job creation."

In truth, there's only so much the government can do to create jobs, short of expensive stimulus bills or public works programs such as those launched by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Numerous and complex factors that affect the U.S. and global economies play a bigger role.

Curiously, perhaps, both parties have accused the other of fixating on health care instead of jobs. Health care, more than any other issue, energized the Democrats' liberal base in 2008 and 2009, and, conversely, fired up the GOP's conservative base as well.
Barack Obama campaigned on overhauling the health care system, and his backers saw his 2008 election as a mandate to follow through. In Congress, the process proved extremely difficult and partisan, with no Republicans voting for the final version.
Raucous protests against the legislation helped launch the tea party movement in 2009. Dozens of GOP candidates ran last fall on a promise to overturn the health law. Once elected, they claimed their own mandate to act right away on the issue, just as Democrats had done two years earlier.
Both parties risk appearing to cater to their hard-core supporters at the expense of political centrists worried mainly about jobs.

A new AP-GfK poll asked 1,000 adults to name the one thing they would want the federal government to do this year, if it accomplished only a single thing. The economy and jobs ranked first, cited by 38 percent of those surveyed. By comparison, 31 percent named health care, with some supporting Obama's health law and some opposing it.

No other issue exceeded 12 percent; abortion barely registered.
Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, who oversaw GOP House campaigns in past years, defended the early focus on health care and abortion. "These are commitments we made" during the fall campaign, he said, adding that a heavier emphasis on jobs is coming soon.

HuffPost Commenter:  Mafdet 9 hours ago (10:17 PM)

Me and my business partner own a small manufactur­ing business and here's our observatio­n about what caused spiraling unemployme­nt: The consumer banks had started their freefall in Dec 2007. They were looking at inestimabl­e losses from the defaulted mortgages they were going to be left holding the bag on, and lawsuits from all the states. So as 2008 Read More... closed they wouldn't be lending for years to any but risk-free prospects. So certainly not to small business. As 2008 closed, the small manufactur­ing and profession­al services base in America had been laying off workforce to preserve cash flow for 12 months. This sector employs almost 50% of America.

Well, even though the consumer banks were screwed, the investment banks were sitting pretty, because Henry Paulson had convinced this president and the last that the investment banks should not have to buy back the hundreds of thousands of fraudulent securities that they dumped on overseas markets through thousands of Enron-like shell companies for more than a decade. In fact, they would keep the proceeds of their fraud and they would even cash in any insurance policies on bad mortgages they were still holding!

But Henry reasoned, this made the investment banks perfectly situated to help the American economy. What we would do is give the big investment banks $25b each and they would turn that back around and lend it to small banks that would then lend to America's small manufactur­ing and profession­al services sector and we would start hiring people again and shore up employment­. AND WE WOULD HAVE. Because then, as now, all other market conditions were favorable for growth.

But the investment banks did not do that. They instead said to themselves­: We could make a lot more money by denying it to the small banks! By strangling them and the businesses that depend on them, we create bargains. Then we can leverage this here bail out money two or three times over and we can snap up the assets that we drive under at a value of hundreds of billions. Then we'll make a big deal of paying back the bail out money early and everyone will think we're heroes.

In their wake, they left hundreds of failed banks, thousands of failed businesses­, and relentless­ly spiraling unemployme­nt. And the banks - no banks - have loaned to small manufactur­ers and profession­al service firms for more than 3 years now.

That is why we keep seeing the headlines about employment not returning to normal levels for years. It takes about 10 years to restore a country's manufactur­ing and profession­al services base once it has been devastated as badly as ours has.

Congress - neither party - didn't care because they were and are invested in these banks.

No comments: