with Keith yesterday. The idea is we have a crumbling infrastructure (made of sugar, as KO put it) and creating jobs in that sector helps stimulate the economy and leads to much needed repair.

public service employment.  They all made about 25K a year with benefits, which was paid for with federal money.  To qualify, an individual had to be long term unemployed (UI exhaustee and out of work for more than 27 weeks).  They worked in and for city, county, and state governments, schools, and non-profits.  Many got on-the-job training while doing public service, which helped them get hired by their job sites or gave them the skills to transition to other jobs.  It was a very helpful program for the unemployed, and the community.  

One year may not be enough.  Michigan has been sitting on a 7+ percent unemployment rate for over seven years.  Our economic situation is a disaster as big as Katrina and even more ignored.  Bill Clinton passing Reagan's NAFTA was the worse thing he could have done to the heavily industrialized manufacturing states, of which, Michigan was the biggest.

Rachel just made the same point with KO in agreement on countdown this evening and talked about Edwards' prescient ability to have come out with this before the trouble hit.

Its called leadership!

If he had any media support at all, he would be kicking ass.  

would have done for the parts of Louisiana and Mississippi hit by Katrina.  Oh, but that's right, we live in 2008, we live in the information age!

Edwards plan doesn't call for tax cuts because as economists have pointed these packages have had very little effect in the past and with the devastation of our industrial base, goods will in all likely-hood be manufactured over-seas whether it clothes or shoes for the kids and while it might stimulate retail sales, the effect on manufacturing would be minimal.

Edwards is calling for a $25 Billion dollar stimulus package Federally and $75 Billion of direct aide to the states.

His focus is on infrastructure and it may have escaped you but the Corp of Engineers study showed that 65% of the bridges in this country are in need of replacement or serious overhaul, as well as roads in need of repair.

These are traditional heavy construction projects, but Edwards wants to focus on "clean energy" and "green collar" jobs, like the conversion or public buildings and schools to solar power, environmentally friendly high speed mass transit rail systems, wind farms, biofuels and similar projects.

The "Clean Energy" market has already grown to be a $55 Billion without government stimulus, but with a stimulus package it can grow larger and there is a cost benefit return on such jobs.

As an example in South Carolina...

The Edwards plan would:

  * Provide about $1.5 billion to South Carolina
  * Expand benefits for about 9000 long-term unemployed workers
  * Provide fiscal relief for the state of South Carolina – which is facing a $430 million deficit next year, according to the state Board of Economic Advisors.

So what you are talking about is a 21st century WPA, which is a fundamentally more sound idea than giving people simply a rebate check and telling them to go to the mall and find something American to buy.

PS. Obama opted for some job training in this area but not actual job creation.

Not only does it work well as an economic stimulus, it creates jobs and ensures the functionality of our basic foundation.

JedReport's signature? It was pointing out the yak-fest between Hillary and Obama while pointing out that Edwards stuck to what really matters.

No one cares about politicians attacking each other over trivial matters.

I would love if Barack and Hillary would stop arguing long enough to articulate a point.

Hillary has spoken out against Wal-Mart in recent years, from what I know, but it's a definite strike against her.

By the way, Obama's wife sits on the board of a company whose biggest customer is Wal-Mart. Sort of funny.

when Sam Walton was alive.   Read Bill Clinton's bio - he could turn to Sam Walton to sell American products from factories that needed saving.   During the 1980s Wal-Mart was touting Sam Walton's "Buy American" campaign which did help out some U.S. companies by buying their products when imports were on the verge of driving them out of business.  So I don't see how you can blame Hillary for being on the board of this Arkansas success-story when the mass-exploitation of slave labor in Asian markets was still a decade or so in the future.  Her tenure was 1986-1992.

Michelle Obama was on the board of a Walmart supplier, TreeHouse Foods, UNtil May 2007.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/...

I don't mean to take this discussion too far off topic, but I've just heard something that I'd like to have clarified:  Did casino owners in NV really tell employees that if they caucused for Edwards, they'd be out of a job the next day??  I mean, did they?  And if they really did, then how is it that they can get away with such a blatant interference with our electoral process?

It also helps to explain why he only got 5% of the vote.  People were coerced, by fear of unemployment in very scary/shaky economical times and couldn't afford (literally) the risk of standing strong politically.

I support Edwards and totally oppose Barack Obama.  

Obama is a big free trader just like the Clintons. In fact, I don't see a dime's worth of difference between Hillary and Obama.  They are both sitting Senators who haven't done a thing to change or challenge Harry Reid and the status quo.  Edwards' 5 year old votes get barfed up repeatedly, while Hillary's and Obama's votes and non-votes of TODAY get a free pass.  

If you want some background on Obama, read these.  They demonstrate his willing to buck the status quo and fight for change - not. What a joke.  It's as funny as Lieberman claiming to be a Democrat.

It's the next best thing to a vote... :)

A lot of them have spent so much time and energy on here trying to get Edwards' supporters to switch to Obama.

Now as an Edwards supporter, it's my turn to convince Obama supporters to jump on the Edwards train. ;-)

Edwards, Independents and Republicam voters.

I just can't imagine that any Democrat would dislike her enough to actually hope that she loses to the Republican.

We cannot afford even one more Republican appointee to the Supreme Court, not to mention the other federal courts.  If our court system becomes any more conservative we will be looking at a new Lockner era.  Then for a generation it won't matter how liberal our Congress is, or how progressive our president is.