Skip to main content

View Diary: Response to "An Open Letter to Michelle Obama" (11 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  next stage reply (0+ / 0-)

    TM, you said:

    . . . . But it will be interpreted as "From each according to his ability and to each according to his need".  While people in general are all for a jobs program, the general public is not all for government directly providing the jobs.  Doing this in moderation is quite acceptable.  But government run decision making is not palatable to the majority of the people in this country.

    I really don't think this is credible. There's a 30% output gap right; and their are between 25 - 30 million Americans looking for full-time work who can't get it. Why not? Because "free enterprise" and the private sector have FAILED to produce the necessary jobs. Not only that the private sector has failed to produce full employment since the 1960s. It came close during Clinton's years due to Greenspan's debt bubble, but it never got to that full employment figure of 3% of the work force between jobs and no under-employed.

    Now all the FJG proposal is saying, is that when the private sector cannot produce full employment, let the Government sector guarantee a job at a wage that won't compete with the private sector, in order to provide work for people who want to work; in order to keep their work-related skills and attitudes current, and in order to ensure that the people the private sector can't employ are employable when the private sector want to hire them. Notice that all this assumes that the chief employer will be the private sector, and that the FJG program will shrink to almost no people when and if the private sector grows enough to employ everybody who doesn't have a permanent civil service. In other words FJG jobs are transition jobs. They are jobs that keep people off welfare and employable. They are jobs that give work to people that is valuable to society to do things that the private sector cannot or will not do. That is not communism; it is just common sense, and it is not about replacing the private sector, it is about back-stopping it when it fails and destroys much of the country's net financial assets.

    They have been raised on the idea of free enterprise and they are not going to accept a government run economy in which the government decides which projects are to be staffed and bankrolled.   That is what you will get for your effort because you are going too far too fast.

    This just doesn't compute. The Government will staff FJG projects with guidance from State, local, and community authorities providing the Government with priorities in relation to what should be done. This is not in place of the private sector doing it. The projects will only be areas where the private sector is not employing people because it is not active. So, what you have is a situation where the private sector has already decided not to do certain projects; not to get involved because it evaluates those projects as unprofitable. So, at that point the government will get involved and enable projects that have great public value to be done with FJG labor. We know this will work, because we are still living off the the results of projects completed by the New Deal over 70 years ago.

    So, yes, the Government will make decisions where the private sector has already abdicated the field. But this will not compete with the private sector; because when business needs the labor employed by the government; it can always hire that labor away since the FJG wage will be the benchmark minimum wage, and all the private sector has to do is to beat that by a few % to hire the labor away.

    I don't think there's any communism in this at all, or any socialism either. It's just providing people with a real economic bill of rights and with freedom from want and freedom from fear.

    •  We are talking past one another (0+ / 0-)

      You have your opinions concerning what is politically possible and I disagree with you.  We do not have any real disagreement over the validity of your position as regards monetary economics or economics in general. In THAT we are on the same page.  But with the current situation in political discourse being what it is, there is no way to educate the public as to the REALITY of fiat money or the concept of government as the insurance company it should be.  That's right.  Government is the social insurance company and only government can provide that function.  Your jobs program is an illustration of one way to do that.  But people have been so misled about OUR government and the way it was and is designed to operate that any hint of true fiat money is the boogerman.  The "government is out of control" crowd are winning in the voting booths.  Any proposal that would be politically viable would have to be so straight forward as to be utterly invincible.  Medicare Buy In is such a proposal in that it costs NOTHING and provides more freedom and more choice.  Yet the Democrats can't seem to do anything with it.  If they can't sell that, then they sure as hell can't sell what you are proposing.  You are unable to sell it too.  Not because you aren't correct in your analysis, but because you are too far outside the current discourse.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site