Skip to main content

I have been writing several Jobs bills diaries the past few weeks because this really is the NUMBER ONE ISSUE facing America.  Health care reform, Afghanistan, Regulation Reform, and Climate Change are all important but JOBS JOBS JOBS is by far what America cares about.

Well the Senate Democrats particularly Senator Dorgan and Senator Durbin are working on a Jobs bill in tandem with Mark Zandi.  They are coming up with a bill that will be about $300 billion.

While the GOP has been blocking the health care bill the past 3 days, the Democratic Senators have still been working diligently behind the scenes.

Apparently they got a presentation of a $230 billion jobs bill proposal by Mark Zandi in their Wednesday caucus meeting.

A number of the  jobs proposals backed by Democrats make up a $230 billion package proposed by Mark Zandi of  Moody's, who made a presentation to  Senate Democrats Wednesday. The provisions supported by Zandi along with new spending on infrastructure, a favored approach of top House Democrats, would cost between $291 billion and $299 billion, according to estimates by lawmakers and economists.

In addition to Zandi's ideas, some of the proposals that are being considered:

Lawmakers are calling for extending aid to the unemployed, infrastructure spending, a hiring tax credit and increased small business loans.

Some of the break down of the $300 billion figure:

$100 billion:

Lawmakers are looking to extend unemployment insurance and COBRA healthcare benefits for the unemployed through 2010 at a cost of $100 billion alone, according to the sponsor of House legislation, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.).

$69 billion:

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) pushed Wednesday for $69 billion for highway and transit projects that could be started almost immediately with funding. Oberstar had criticized the earlier stimulus bill for not including enough infrastructure spending, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) have voiced support for more infrastructure spending to create jobs.

$20 billion:

Democrats would also increase loans from the Small Business Administration (SBA) at a cost of $20 billion, according to Zandi.

He called for raising limits for the SBA loans, removing the interest rate cap on them in order to allow credit to be given more freely and using leftover bank bailout money as small-business credit.

$75 billion:

Providing more aid to states, a move to stem further job losses, also has support among lawmakers, The New Republic reported Tuesday. Zandi, noting that the state governments will have a $150 billion budget shortfall in fiscal 2011, has called for $75 billion in federal aid for states.

$600 million:

A federal work-share program backed by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and four other Democrats would cost about $600 million.

In all:

The total cost of all of those proposals would be $291.6 billion.

Zandi has called for a $230 billion job-creation package that includes the small-business loans, state fiscal aid, hiring tax credit, work-share program, unemployment and COBRA insurance and state fiscal aid. His cost estimates for most of the programs are similar to those given by lawmakers.

Adding the Oberstar-DeFazio infrastructure proposal to that sum would bring the total to $299 billion.

How would this affect the unemployment rate:

The $230 billion package backed by Zandi would lower the unemployment rate by 0.7 percent by the end of next year and would save or create 1.3 million jobs, according to his estimates.

Thus in addition to the stimulus package this Jobs bill could bring down the unemployment rate in the 9-9.5 range which is BETTER than where it is now.

They want this paid for and not to add to the deficit.

Some suggestions include using some of the left over TARP funds and the White House is in negotiations with Congress on just that.

Under pressure from Democrats in Congress, the Obama administration has begun talks with lawmakers about tapping unspent money from the government’s financial bailout program to help offset additional spending to create jobs and aid the long-term unemployed.

It appears that the White House is on board and have their own suggestions:

Among the ideas under consideration, according to National Economic Council director Lawrence Summers and others:

• Extending unemployment insurance benefits beyond this year. Earlier extensions already have made some people eligible for a record 99 weeks. Giving money to jobless Americans spurs consumer spending, which saves or creates jobs.

• Sending more aid to cash-strapped state and local governments. States are writing their 2010-11 budgets, and federal aid included in February's stimulus package runs out in 2010. Without another bailout, they might be forced to cut spending or raise taxes, hindering the recovery.

• Creating tax incentives, such as for small businesses or manufacturers. During last year's campaign, Obama proposed a tax credit for each new job created.

• Financing more infrastructure and energy efficiency projects. Obama favors an "infrastructure bank" with public and private money, which he promoted in last year's campaign and this year's budget.

My own suggestion is revisit the recovery package and use some of the unused funds that are going towards tax cuts and put those instead for infrastructure spending which will create MORE jobs.

I also think that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid need to coordinate better so this is done much more quickly.  Plus the package should include direct government hiring for green jobs, etc.

Originally posted to Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:10 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (140+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GainesT1958, JekyllnHyde, fladem, Cederico, DeminNewJ, Terri, ferg, mwm341, askew, whataboutbob, RunawayRose, wu ming, frisco, MarkInSanFran, missLotus, sja, mkfarkus, wader, mwk, Dallasdoc, gmb, GN1927, rockhound, lcrp, gdunn, JohnGor0, jim bow, radarlady, PAbluestater, DianeNYS, Elise, PBen, kefauver, Cynical Copper, Turkana, Pam from Calif, optimo, CWalter, coolbreeze, jct, vigilant meerkat, cybersaur, mrobinson, NBBooks, Libby Shaw, tapestry, Preston S, el cid, max stirner, profh, revgerry, markthshark, rkh, Nulwee, Aaa T Tudeattack, DBunn, Noor B, Fredly, dmh44, Dartagnan, ColoTim, Jimdotz, joedemocrat, malharden, bobswern, jnhobbs, Jack the R, oxon, MKinTN, ShadowSD, DraftChickenHawks, dotster, scooter in brooklyn, OleHippieChick, mamamedusa, shanay, elwior, skohayes, jamess, royce, pamelabrown, smartdemmg, mofembot, Liberal Of Limeyland, luckylizard, cheforacle, DixieDishrag, Athenocles, dont think, cybrestrike, J M F, meatwad420, snackdoodle, Stranded Wind, viet vet, kat68, Yalin, krllos, Daily Activist, MKSinSA, oxfdblue, bfitzinAR, Deoliver47, sherijr, northernlights, mahakali overdrive, carmenjones, math4barack, sulthernao, swaminathan, LaughingPlanet, bullyness, Interceptor7, fidellio, NY brit expat, ItsSimpleSimon, Mariken, DrFitz, sharonsz, addisnana, gereiztkind, MsGrin, dmet, BrowniesAreGood, Hill Jill, michiganlefty, Amayi, Mistral Wind, marleycat, Muskegon Critic, theone718, BarackStarObama, bamabikeguy, randomfacts, jeffrey789, Wonk Hussein, KingofSpades, rmrice, MichaelNY, raolin

    Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

    by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:10:26 AM PST

    •  It's a start but here is a list (32+ / 0-)

      of what's actually required just to repair the infrastructure we already have. According to figures compiled by the America Society of Civil Engineers, a multi-year program of just repairing all existing U.S. infrastructure requires an additional $1.134 trillion dollars than already planned funding.

      At 18,000 jobs created for every $1 billion, such a program spread over five years would directly create 6.124 million jobs.

      American Society of Civil Engineers 2009 Infrastructure Report Card (in billions)

       5-Year NeedsSpendingShortfall
      Roads and Bridges$930.0$380.5$549.5
      Drinking Water & Wastewater$255.0$146.4$108.6
      Solid & Hazardous Waste$77.0$33.6$43.4
      Inland Waterways$50.0$29.5$20.5
      Public Parks and Recreation$85.0$36.84$48.17

      A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

      by NBBooks on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:57:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I can hardly wait (7+ / 0-)

      for the Creepublicans in the House or Senate to try blocking this one.

      Imagine: being against health care AND against more jobs during 2010.

    •  Where's the green jobs? (11+ / 0-)

      Why highways instead of highspeed rail?

      Why not more for smart grid, solar, wind, and efficiency?

      •  Information infrastructure (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pris from LA

        I'd like to see gov't based fiber roll-out to medium and large cities. We're in the Information Age now and the United States is falling behind on (affordable) high-bandwidth broadband. Many of our economic competitors have faster Internet connections than we do. We need high-speed Internet infrastructure. Laying fiber connections throughout medium and large cities would help ISPs reluctant to spend the money to connect fiber to homes. This is important because so much money is spent over the Internet and more and more folks are tele-commuting (which reduces our need for fossil fuels). Consumers are also demanding more from the Internet that our current comparatively low-speed Internet connections can deliver. Spending money on Internet infrastructure also helps to train and employ people in networking jobs for the 21st century!

        AG Holder is obstructing justice by actively refusing investigation of war crimes.

        by cybersaur on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:06:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Why can't we get a public transportation system (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pris from LA

        based off of rail, in and out of San Francisco, for the love of all that is holy.

        They've been widening the freeway for about 25 years now.

        They have yet to install any sort of railway beyond BART, which services a few areas, but hardly all.

        Public bus service is considered very bad, and in my experience, has been.

        We literally have one of the worst public transportation systems I have ever seen in the 2 million commuter area here.

        "Rule Forty-two. All persons more than a mile high to leave the court." - Alice in Wonderland

        by mahakali overdrive on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:51:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Good, but not enough (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lcrp, NY brit expat, agito

      not nearly enough. Thanks for the news, though.

    •  It's better than nothing; bad ISM nos. this AM... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tmo, Jagger, J M F, NY brit expat
      ANYTHING is better than nothing, of course, but me thinks this efforts MANY days late and MANY dollars short...which is as much of a sign of appeasement to the deficit hawks--a political nightmare--as anything else.

      That being said...a NEW statistical nightmare just breaking as I post this comment...and it ain't pretty:

      October-November was when we were supposed to feel the height of the effects of the initial stimulus bill...but these numbers by the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) were just reported for the SERVICE SECTOR this morning, and the stock market's already reacting negatively to them...

      (Remember: SERVICE SECTOR accounts for over 80% of all business activity, the barely positive MANUFACTURING SECTOR numbers, which were publicized earlier in the week, account for LESS than 20% of all business activity.)

      From the AP over the past few minutes: "Service sector shrinks unexpectedly in Nov."

      Service sector shrinks unexpectedly in Nov.
      From Associated Press
      December 03, 2009 11:10 AM EST

      NEW YORK - A private measure of U.S. service sector activity unexpectedly shrank in November after two months of tepid growth, as constrained consumer spending and rising unemployment hinder a broad recovery.

      The Institute for Supply Management's service index dropped to 48.7 from 50.6 in October. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had expected a level of 51.1.

      Any reading below 50 signals contraction. The service sector grew in September for the first time in 13 months.

      The ISM measure tracks more than 80 percent of the country's economic activity, including such diverse industries as health care, retail, financial services and transportation.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:04:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd tip this (0+ / 0-)

        except that you cut and pasted an entire article. Thanks for informing us about the bad news, though.

        •  Other reasons not to tip: it's from the AP... (0+ / 0-)

          ..."a gloom and doomer" posted it...there are always reasons...even when "the article" is 6 sentences.

          This is a reality-based blog.

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:14:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You don't seem to understand this (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

            I'm done here.

            •  If it bothers you so much, I'd suggest you report (0+ / 0-)


              One can do nothing to correct this--which I would if I could--since it was in a comment. But, more importantly, it's a significant stretch to call it a violation of site policy, since the article's little more than a 6-sentence blurb.

              "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

              by bobswern on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:21:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The irony is this diary has a far greater... (0+ / 0-)

                ...violation of the site's policy in it, with regard to the reprint of The Hill article.

                Apparently, that didn't stop you (or me!), from rec'ing it.

                Looks like there's a bit of a bias here in your comment, IMHO.

                "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

                by bobswern on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:29:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I didn't check that (0+ / 0-)

                  I'll check it now and will unrecommend if I agree with you.

                  I know that you can't edit a post. I wish we could edit posts.

                •  OK, I checked the article in The Hill (0+ / 0-)

                  Yes, there's a lot of quoting, but it isn't the entire article, and I previously engaged in a discussion with people who seemed to assert authoritatively that even quoting an entire article, with separate commentary on every part, could be defensible on copyright grounds. This diary does quote maybe 60% of the article, but it's not a straight cut and paste job.

                  On the other hand, you provided commentary, too.

                  I guess I don't know anymore what site policy is, so maybe I'll just leave it up to site officials from now on, unless a post is almost nothing but a total cut and paste.

      •  The stock market is up over 50% (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        askew, Noor B

        from the lows in March, and GDP has reversed a deadly trend.  In fact the market has gone up since many here were suggesting it would tank as a result of Dubai.

        The stock markets are largely irrelevent to people's welfare, and increasing it is not any goal of a left of center economic policy.  Nevertheless the simple truth is that the markets have reacted positively to the stimulus package and many of the indicators reaction positvely.  For example the ISM number no longer points to contraction as it is over 50.  

        The stimulus succeeded in many ways but it wasn't large enough.  It helped avert another depression but it was not large enough to generate growth fast enough.

        So it is good to hear about another jobs bill.

        The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

        by fladem on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:44:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I never said the mkt. would tank re: Dubai (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Please show me where I made that statement.

          And the Manufacturing ISM nos.--which pale in importance to the Service ISM nos.--were paltry at best, with Calculated Risk saying the following earlier earlier this week:


          ...a reading above 52 for the ISM employment index is consistent with an increase in the BLS data for manufacturing.

          Although there is significant variability, the current level of 50.8 percent in November suggests further manufacturing job losses.

          Calculated Risk's closing comments (currently on that site's top page) on today's ISM Services Index nos.:

          ... This is a grim report. According to this survey, the service sector contracted in November, and employment also contracted at about the same rate as in October.

          Again, services account for more than 80% of the country's economy; manufacturing, less than 20%.

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:01:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  BTW13-23 Trillion to banks, 300 Billion for jobs. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      0wn, Pris from LA

      Yeah, that's a fair taxpayer trade, hunh?

      Until someone in this Administration and Congress stands up for a re-structuring of the entire fantasy football betting economy, everything-else is mere window dressing. Chump change voter buy-off, BS - maybe it will work again but I doubt it.

    •  Another bank giveaway??? Re: SBA loan rate cap (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Noor B, 0wn, Pris from LA

      Don't like this - even a little bit.  TARP was supposed to loosen credit, and assist small businesses in the long run.  That was one of the selling points.

      And now they want to raise / eliminate the cap on the loan rates for SBA guaranteed loans?

      I'm calling bullshit on this one.

      Time for me to get a gun and a mean ass dog that rides well in a car.

      by Richard Cranium on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:47:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let's hope the Gop don't turn into a $ 300 bill (0+ / 0-)
    •  Sounds like socialism to me... (0+ / 0-)

      ...or communism... or some other "-ism" that I dont know the actual definition of...

      Also, I can kill you with my brain.

      by Puffin on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:58:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  They better hurry. 11/2010 isn't far off. (16+ / 0-)

    When an old man dies, a library burns down. --African proverb

    by Wom Bat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:13:11 AM PST

    •  Exactly. It would be great if the House could (18+ / 0-)

      coordinate with the Senate so that their jobs bill will look like the Senate's.  The House should pass theirs in December while the Senate can pass theirs in January.

      Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

      by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:16:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  No shit it isn't. (38+ / 0-)

      I think they ought to abandon the tax credits and just spend directly at this point.  Every business I know is downsizing, not hiring.  They won't take advantage of the tax credits because they don't have the business to support the employees; and I think WalMart along with the rest of the giant multi-nationals have gotten more than their fair share of the pie from this government so far.

      •  This is an excellent point... (27+ / 0-)

        ...and is a key flaw in strategies allegedly designed to stimulate business growth.

        Tax cuts for new hires are meaningless when your business market is shrinking. If durable goods sales are down I don't need more factory workers, even if that next hire is 15% cheaper than the last new hire was.

        It's a fundamentally un-sound tactic that only helps big, healthy businesses (and markets) get bigger and heavier. It does nothing to expand us into new industries or revive lagging markets and lagging small businesses.

        Northern Virginia -- Where the medians are covered by campaign signs 300 days per year.

        by malharden on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:27:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  original idea in their life (2+ / 0-)

          The majority of our democrats haven't had an original idea in their life.  Lobbyists hand them a boilerplate list of solutions and off they go like robots.  Anything unconventional, or risky, or truly effective or non-approved by lobbyists, ....God forbid.

          •  Well, they need to be educated. (12+ / 0-)

            INVESTMENT in PEOPLE is what is needed NOW.


            Elizabeth Warren: America Without a Middle Class

            Through it all, families never asked for a handout from anyone, especially Washington. They were left to go on their own, working harder, squeezing nickels, and taking care of themselves. But their economic boats have been taking on water for years, and now the crisis has swamped millions of middle class families.

            The contrast with the big banks could not be sharper. While the middle class has been caught in an economic vise, the financial industry that was supposed to serve them has prospered at their expense. Consumer banking -- selling debt to middle class families -- has been a gold mine. Boring banking has given way to creative banking, and the industry has generated tens of billions of dollars annually in fees made possible by deceptive and dangerous terms buried in the fine print of opaque, incomprehensible, and largely unregulated contracts.

            And when various forms of this creative banking triggered economic crisis, the banks went to Washington for a handout. All the while, top executives kept their jobs and retained their bonuses. Even though the tax dollars that supported the bailout came largely from middle class families -- from people already working hard to make ends meet -- the beneficiaries of those tax dollars are now lobbying Congress to preserve the rules that had let those huge banks feast off the middle class.

      •  excellent comment! n/t. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jct, malharden, addisnana, Wom Bat

        "People ask, is there one word that you have more faith in than any other word, ...I'd say its Participation." - Pete Seeger

        by PAbluestater on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:59:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  That is exactly what I was thinking ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        inclusiveheart, malharden

        Both direct government job creation and direct investment in greener industry and further stimulation of effective demand (again lengthening the period of unemployment insurance, Cobra coverage, and access to further government assistance) would be far more efficacious if we are interested in fighting unemployment and stimulating effective demand to create more employment. I also agree with fladem above that we should be investing in public transport and rail rather than building new roads (keeping the ones we already have in repair will also provide short-term job creation).

        Tax credits for hiring are of little use if there is insufficient demand for your products to justify the hiring.

        No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable (Adam Smith, 1776, I, p. 96).

        by NY brit expat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:48:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think it will be interesting to see how (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          malharden, NY brit expat

          many of the hiring tax credits in the last stimulus have actually been used - and who was using them.  I would bet that the amount is less than was allocated and that the credits will have gone largely to big, currently healthy and stable corporations.

          The latest CBO review of the last stimulus found also that Congress omitted certain things in the regular budget because there were similar items in the stimulus.  Which effectively means that this year's stimulus is actually smaller than advertised.  By exactly how much, I don't know - and I don't think we will know until after it's timeline has been completed.  But we do know from a certain number of facts that the "not enough" is probably even less than we thought it was.

          •  I missed the point that Congress had eliminated (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            inclusiveheart, malharden

            things from the regular budget because they appeared in the stimulus; at times I really wonder if they understand what they are doing ... the stimulus was insufficient in size in the first place and certainly tax incentives and tax credits for the businesses were the most ineffective programme to stimulate the economy. To think that further duplicate aid to programmes that may have actually increased effective demand and stimulated employment and growth were not provided (as they were already covered by the stimulus) is so aggravating.

            This is really just a basic understanding of the theory of effective demand put forward by Keynes and Kalecki and an understanding that growth is demand determined or demand driven; why is it that hard to understand that firms will decide to increase production (and hire people) only if they expect an increase in demand for their products?

            Thanks for the information, I really would like to see how many of the hiring tax credits were actually taken up and in what industries or services they were used.

            No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable (Adam Smith, 1776, I, p. 96).

            by NY brit expat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:05:12 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Here is what I really don't get... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              NY brit expat

              How the fuck did they think that money they were giving to multi-national coporations was going to really stay in this country and help Americans that live here?  I mean we all knew in the 80's that trickle-down economics was shit, but now with the much expanded global economic model - how in the hell did they expect this stimulus money to get to Americans living here?

              Would it not have made much more sense to start with giving Americans living here money that could then get sucked up through this global economy?  I mean at least - even if it was only fleeting - they would have managed to touch the voters who have a fairly significant role in letting them keep their jobs.  Those trillions they gave to the banks would have ended up in the banks eventually had they given that money to the people.  We're not the ones that lose astronomical sums of money overnight in some foreign bond market... lol

              These people are a combination of idiots and crooks.  It is really scary.

              •  The most effective way to ensure that (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                inclusiveheart, Pris from LA

                stimulus money stayed in the country was by giving the majority of it to the poor and to the recently unemployed and the working poor, not only does it help those most in need, but they spend it on necessities which will boost the economy more in terms of increasing demand for products (e.g., agricultural and food production) produced in the US which sustains production of these goods and services and increases employment in the whole sector. Even if it is spent on buying cheap clothing from overseas that is not a problem due to the nature of the globalised capitalist system. Moreover, direct investment in restructuring American manufacturing would be extremely helpful not only to provide short-term employment, but longer-term employment. Infrastructure is good for providing short term jobs and also we desperately need infrastructure repairs and new infrastructure.

                I am rather disheartened, but at least this bill is actually an attempt to deal with the essentials to help people keep and create new jobs. It just seems at times as though their switches are on the off position on what is important.

                No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable (Adam Smith, 1776, I, p. 96).

                by NY brit expat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:10:45 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  What justification do they have for the offshore (6+ / 0-)

      jobs credit?  And do any other countries have such a job drainer?

      Here in Alabama, Gov. Riley is giving Mercedes another $100 credit for plant expansion, I think he's got that dealio above $500,000 per job created now.

      Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 30 seconds exceeded in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\

      by bamabikeguy on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:36:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Eh (14+ / 0-)

    I am not that impressed.  I would rather see something innovative like a temporary window for retirement to open up to everyone aged 59+ (they would get full SS and medicare).  That could create real permanent jobs, not temporary construction ones.

    •  I'd like to see something else innovative (36+ / 0-)

      How about a Wall Street trades tax of 0.25% on all stock, bond and derivatives trades?  Wall Street sucked this economy dry until it collapsed.  Wall Street can pay to rebuild it.

      This transactions tax could be used to support an infrastructure and domestic manufacturing bank that would fund the rebuilding of the country and the development of future manufacturing industries.  We need a manufacturing policy in this country, and as Bill Ford put it not long ago, not having a policy is a policy.

      To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

      by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:34:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Esp. when you consider how many foriegn traders (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc, ColoTim, MKSinSA

        would help in the rebuilding, no skin off our noses.

        Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 30 seconds exceeded in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\

        by bamabikeguy on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:38:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You are joking right? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          There are plenty of foreign markets where these traders can go to instead that do NOT have a transaction tax. Why do you think they would even spend a second here if they had to pay this tax?

          By the way, how can you be so sure that they won't be exempt from this tax just the way they are in the UK?

          •  Europeans are trying to make this tax worldwide (21+ / 0-)

            Tim Geithner is opposing them.  The best way to make sure investors don't avoid the tax is for everybody to charge it.

            To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

            by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:02:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree.. (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dallasdoc, jct, NBBooks, Pris from LA

              Dallas doc I think this tax is an excellent way to raise revenues we need for programs..

              And, correct, if everyone charges it there is no way
              for investors to avoid it..

              Any chance that might happen?

              "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

              by joedemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:05:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Geithner is opposing them, Sweden, Russia, (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tmo, ferg, Cardinal96, GN1927, bullyness

              Finland and the UK Conservatives (which are poised to win in the next election) are opposed to it. So, not all europeans are for it. By the way, Sweden (I know it is a small country, no influence and all that) had its own experience with this tax and it would be a snowball's chance in hell before they were for this type of tax.

              It would be extremely difficult to make this worldwide.

              •  Oh well, let's not try then (9+ / 0-)

                Sweden is too small a market to impose an unilateral tax.  But if the US and the EU did it in a coordinated way, and persuaded the Japanese to join in, then most of the world would charge the tax.  Then laws could be written to charge the tax on traders as income if they tried to use tax haven markets, or to put leverage on those havens directly, as is currently being done with income tax.

                To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

                by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:09:25 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Both Sweden and Finland are part of the EU. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Pris from LA, bullyness

                  So, while they are small countries, I wouldn't minimize their influence. Furthermore, Sweden has a stock market. If Sweden would not be part of this, don't you think the traders would simply go to Sweden where they don't have to pay this tax?

                  •  Which stocks will they trade in? Lutefisk Inc.? (0+ / 0-)

                    I sincerely doubt there will be a rush to get into the burgeoning Swedish stock market (that was snark!) because of a miniscule (if very lucrative) tax on trades.

          •  It isn't big enough a fee to hurt, but (5+ / 0-)

            would take advantage of the day trading across time zone game, and those big hedge fund budges that just want to skim a quick percent advantage, no intention of long-term investment.

            Its a casino, gotta tip the waitress.

            Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 30 seconds exceeded in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\

            by bamabikeguy on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:26:58 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Either the reign of speculative finannce ends (4+ / 0-)

            or you and I are gonna die, because our society was unwilling to finance the development of a new economy that solves climate change and oil depletion.

            Ain't no way around it. Cross-border capital controls are coming back. Just a matter of time. What the crash of 2008 shows is that the system developed since the 1971 end of the Bretton Woods system just does not work to the marshal and allocate credit to the production of the good and services society needs to survive sustainably.

            So which should be killed off? The present financial system? Or society?

            We have to force investments to have a longer term profit horizon - i.e., we want investors to put their money in an enterprise and leave it there long enough for the real economy to do its work and generate real wealth. This means a horizon of years. Short-term trading, like Goldman Sach's millisecond trading, can perhaps be banned, but I think a better approach would be to just tax all financial market transactions. Someone that buys stock in a company and holds it for years won't hardly notice a tax of one half of one percent, while such a tax would kill someone buying a stock and selling it a few minutes or hours later.

            You move capital out of the country, fill out the forms, it gets taxed, or it gets seized.

            A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

            by NBBooks on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:51:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  I like that idea... (9+ / 0-)

        I think we do need a small tax on financial type transactions to fund needed programs that were neglected the last 30 years.

        "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

        by joedemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:46:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  A tax would be good for Wall Street (15+ / 0-)

          Taxing derivatives contracts, especially, would probably be the best way to regulate them.  If writing derivatives contracts were to some degree expensive, they wouldn't be used unless they served an useful financial purpose.

          The tax would also discourage short-term trading, as traders would pay by far the most tax.  Cutting down a little on the frenetic trading on Wall Street might also help it focus more on the idea of investment, which seems to have been almost entirely lost there.  The financial system is supposed to be about investing in the economy, after all, and the loss of focus on its essential function is one of the main reasons for the mess we're in right now.

          To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

          by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:50:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I think it is a GREAT idea (9+ / 0-)

        and that moeny could be used for infrastructure jobs, paying for the wars, and paying down the debt.

        Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

        by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:49:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  If this is passed, I would leave the Democratic (3+ / 0-)

        party. If you want to go after the REAL Wall Street, the banks who took the TARP money that's fine. Do that. Charge them a special tax or levy.

        But why in the world would you go after the little guy who is just trying to retire with his little 401k or IRA?

        With this "tiny" tax, I would now have to pay a pretty big amount any time I make a re-allocation in my 401k. Furthermore, because of the decreased liquidity in the market, the spreads between bid ask will increase. In other words, the fees my fund company will charge me will sky rocket.

        It is a bad idea if your intention is to not hurt the little guy. They tried this in Sweden and it failed because capital left Sweden to markets that did not have this tax. They have in the UK, but it is full of exemptions for the big boys. And that's the way it would work here as well. Do you really think the big buys, the market makers won't be exempt from this?

        •  Bye (11+ / 0-)

          Wall Street trades would fall dramatically as investors focused on investing rather than trading.  You can minimize tax by using index funds or other vehicles which would undoubtedly instantly spring up to minimize tax burden.

          And as I posted above, we could join the Europeans in seeking to make this tax worldwide.  The move to crack down on tax havens is only gathering steam, and if we coordinated with them on a transactions tax rather than fighting them we could then work on fighting transactions tax havens too.

          To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

          by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:04:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Good-bye to you (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sparhawk, revgerry

            Abandoning the middle class is not greatest idea, do you think? If you look at my past postings you will find I have been a tried and true Democrat over the entire existence of this website. But this idea is over the top.

            I assume you can imagine the ads that will run where investors will start complaining about their new taxes hitting their retirement accounts, while the big boys in New York are all exempt (as they are in the UK).

            So you want people to use index funds and never trade again? What better way to create the next stock market bubble! Get people to buy and never sell. This is just a terrible idea. Hopefully saner minds will prevail.

            You keep saying that we will join the Europeans. You make it sound like they are united, which is just simply not true. Look at Sweden! Heck, look at the EU.

            As you said, good-bye...

            •  So the needs of traders are paramount? (6+ / 0-)

              Is that what you call the middle class?  Stock traders?

              The tax could be reduced for retirement accounts and vehicles.  It's the big boys in New York who would be targeted by such a tax, and if they traded elsewhere the tax could be structured to charge them for it on their income.

              You sound like a typical big business apologist, pretending that Goldman Sachs is a bunch of widows and orphans.

              To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

              by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:16:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Making stuff up (3+ / 1-)
                Recommended by:
                Sparhawk, revgerry, Kickemout
                Hidden by:

                Alright, that's enough. If you are going to making stuff up, then I guess we are done discussing. Here's what you said about me:

                You sound like a typical big business apologist, pretending that Goldman Sachs is a bunch of widows and orphans.

                Here's word for word what I said earlier:
                If you want to go after the REAL Wall Street, the banks who took the TARP money that's fine. Do that. Charge them a special tax or levy.

                How the hell do you go from my statement to your statement accusing me of being a GS apologist?

                Since you are against levying a special tax or levy on GS, I guess I can play your game and ask why are a Goldman Sachs apologist? And since you want to add a special tax on everybody's retirement account, why do hate the middle class?

                By the way, here's what you also claimed:
                The tax could be reduced for retirement accounts and vehicles.  It's the big boys in New York who would be targeted by such a tax,

                As I have mentioned before, it doesn't work that way. Once liquidity is reduced (which it will be dramatically with this tax), everybody's bid and ask spread will increase. This will create higher costs for everybody. Hell, it will worse for the little guy with a retirement account since this is a regressive tax, ie the little guy's percentage will be the same as Warren buffet's percentage.

                For what's its worth, I have contacted all my three representatives. By all means, let's go after Wall Street. But this is an idiotic way of doing it.

                •  HR's because this is a gross misrepresentation (10+ / 0-)

                  of the facts, or plain, will full ignorance. As I commented elsewhere, every proposal for such a tax, is targeted specifically at the financial markets, stocks, bonds, options, forex, futures, and derivatives, beginning with James Tobins original proposal which was aimed only at the forex markets after the 1971 collapse of Bretton Woods.

                  Before 1971, trading in all U.S. financial markets reached the dollar equivalent of the entire U.S. GDP in about nine months.

                  Now, it takes only three days for financial markets to trade the dollar equivalent of the entire U.S. GDP.

                  That. Has. To. End.

                  When a bond, or a derivative on a bond is bought at 8 am, and sold at 2pm to capture the "profit" on a one percent price gain, what wealth has been created? What tangible benefit has been rendered to society?

                  A financial transactions tax is aimed squarely at these types of trades.

                  Will traders and speculators flee?

                  God, I hope so. Traders and speculators are the problem we need to get rid of. What I want is for someone to put their millions or billions into a real enterprise and leave it there long enough for some real wealth to be generated. That means months or even years.

                  Probably the most important insight Keynes ever had was not that in a depression government needs to be the buyer of last resort.

                  Rather, the most important insight Keynes ever had was financial markets are incapable of distinguishing between real enterprise and mere speculation. A financial transactions tax is aimed squarely at that problem.

                  A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

                  by NBBooks on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:34:06 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm not sure yet where (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sparhawk, Dallasdoc, SilverOz

                    I come down on this, because I see both sides.

                    You mention trading in 1971, but you fail to mention that bid-ask spreads were huge in those periods, and the cost to trade stocks for individual investors was very high. The increased liquidity in the markets today has allowed the decimilization of stock prices, very, very narrow spreads, very deep liquidty, and allows Joe Blow investor to buy stocks for $4.95 at TradeKing.

                    20 years ago Joe Blow would easily pay $50/trade and get a very poor price because of the large bid-ask spreads.

            •  I do believe the trade tax (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Pris from LA

              exempted trades under $100k.

        •  actually, I heard that this tax was being (13+ / 0-)

          designed so that retirement funds were exempt. Also, it really only hurts high-frequency traders, not small traders who don't trade in and out multiple times a day or second.

          •  Like Goldman Sachs? (5+ / 0-)

            The big Wall Street investment banks would be hit heavily by a tax like this.  Who better to raise tax revenue from?  

            To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

            by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:11:58 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  What people don't realize is that (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sparhawk, revgerry, ruascott

            with reduced liquidity, the spread between bid and ask prices will increase. Nobody will be exempt from this. So, as a result, anybody with a retirement will be charged higher fees.

            So, it is false advertising to claim that retirement funds are exempt. They are not.

            •  What kind of fees are you paying now? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Brooke In Seattle, Pris from LA

              Most retirement accounts have substantially larger fees charged by private companies already.  An 0.25% tax would be a minor addition.  You're really making this out to be a much bigger barrier than it would be to small investors.  It's the big traders, especially the institutional ones, who would pay the large majority of the tax.

              To announce that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -TR

              by Dallasdoc on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:34:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re (0+ / 0-)

                An 0.25% tax would be a minor addition.

                It absolutely would not!

                Let's say I have a $250,000 retirement account (a comparatively small amount, all things considered, lot's of middle class people have asset amounts like this).

                Let's say I get spooked and decide to shift my asset allocation from stocks to stable value funds. I have to pay $625 for the privilege! Small retail investors will have no ability to control their futures, having to pay the equivalent of a month's rent just to rebalance their investments.

                I don't know about you, but investment is going to be totally stifled if you know you're going to pay 0.5% off the top just to be in an investment at all.

                •  A lot of middle class have nothing like that (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Dallasdoc, Brian B

                  $250,000 is a huge number considering that:

                  The median (half have more and half have less) 401k balance as of the end of 2008 was: $12,655.

                  The average (total 401k divided by total participants) was: $45,519

                  There is almost zero chance that A LOT of middle class folks have retirement accounts of around $250,000.

                  Those folks in the 80th to 95th percentile of income may have such figures but it is highly unlikely that there are a lot of people in the 40th through 60th percentiles that had the income - and thus the contribution rates - nor the kinds of returns on investment to approach anywhere near $250,000.

                  Source of information (PDF):
                  401(k) Plan Asset Allocation, Account Balances, and Loan Activity in 2008

            •  actually the tax will only really affect (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dallasdoc, Pris from LA

              high-frequency traders. It is a very small tax on each trade but if you happen to be a large trading firm (which you very well might be) and you use high-speed computers to do a huge number of trades in seconds just to speculate then you will be hit hard. The key point is that this only hits the speculators and it makes the market MORE efficient at distributing capital to profit making firms. It is a win-win tax.

          •  If the tax (0+ / 0-)

            decreases liquidity and increases the bid-ask spread in the market, then theoretically anyone who buys any form of stock will end up bearing the burden of the tax. (including retirement accounts).

            Now, practically, i have not seen enough studies on this to determine if it will negatively impact the spreads, so I can't say one way or another. It is just something to be aware of.

        •  Why are you shilling for Wall Street? (6+ / 0-)

          Every proposal for the tax I have ever seen was for taxing transactions in the financial markets, and specifically excluded retirement accounts and commercial bank accounts. If you have an account with Vanguard, no transaction between you and Vanguard is taxed. But if Vanguard decides to sell $500 million of stocks and buy $500 million in bonds instead, that would be taxed.

          A conservative is a scab for the oligarchy.

          by NBBooks on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:11:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Only for short term trades. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Otherwise those of us who suffered the wall street vacuum cleaner to our retirement savings would be further harmed.

        Remember, since the Reagan years peoples' reirements went into the stock market (IRA's) instead of protected accounts,

    •  Me either. This looks like (11+ / 0-)

      more street repaving. A basic pork bill + transfer payments.

      I wish they'd do stuff that actually creates or expands new industries, rather than just building stuff that will probably get built anyway.

      How about a program retrofitting power plants to curb carbon emissions? How about an innovation bank that just sprinkles small loans all over the place for entrepreneurs.

      Japan proved you can't infrastructure your way out of this mess. You have to develop new technology and new industries.

      "Styles upon styles upon styles is what I have. You wanna diss the Phifer but you still don't know the half." - A Tribe Called Quest

      by brooklynbadboy on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:55:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Do you know anyone who can actually LIVE on SS? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tmo, whataboutbob, Pris from LA

      Even people who want to retire and are eligible for SS can by and large not retire because their life savings went up in smoke in Bush/Greenspan's depression.

      •  I sure hope so. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmo, Sparhawk, Jagger, Pris from LA

        Because that's all I'm going to have.

        They need to be talking about raising the minimum, not cutting benefits.

        A lot more people aren't going to have anything but Social Security. Or, if they keep cutting it, a lot of older people in this country are just going to die of hunger and neglect.

        USA! USA!

        "The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." -- Mark Twain

        by Brooke In Seattle on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:40:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Remember... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ...that every bit of all Social Security is paid for by people who actually work for a living. (The same is true for people who saved money over the course of their lifetimes: the economic impact is identical).

          While I support social safety nets as well, remember that it is a zero-sum game. Increases of Social Security have to come directly out of some other priority. That being said, an argument could be made as SilverOz suggested earlier for some kind of on-the-dole welfare state that lots of Western European countries have to counter structurally high unemployment.

    •  Re (0+ / 0-)

      I would rather see something innovative like a temporary window for retirement to open up to everyone aged 59+ (they would get full SS and medicare).  That could create real permanent jobs, not temporary construction ones.

      I don't understand how this is supposed to help. So, a whole class of people who used to work now stop producing and start solely consuming? This helps how?

      •  Frees up jobs and gives them income (0+ / 0-)

        I'm going to take a wild guess and say that unemployment in that age range is much higher than for the population as a whole, maybe twice or three times as higher. So giving those folks some income is an improvement over them starving to death. For the ones who are working, giving them the chance to retire earlier frees up jobs for the rest of the population.

        Californians: The Courage Campaign is working for changing the 2/3 budget rule and for ending Prop 8. Go!

        by tmo on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 12:58:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Since the GOP will threaten to filibuster (6+ / 0-)

    anything that helps unemployed Americans, would this package be subject to reconciliation? It seems to fit the criteria.

  •  Not enough jobs (14+ / 0-)

    How about putting money into a WPA type program to immediately get people jobs.  That would jump start the economy as people making money would spend it which would increase demand and create more permanent jobs.  

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:19:33 AM PST

  •  Let's just hope it doesn't turn into a $300 (19+ / 0-)

    billion package to create 30 Wall Street jobs.

  •  Well, the $45 billion we're getting back (11+ / 0-)

    from Bank of America should help pay for it.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:23:07 AM PST

  •  $300 Billion to "save or create" 1.3 million jobs (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gmb, poxonyou, Pris from LA

    That would be in addition to the 3.5 million that will be "saved or created" by the Recovery Act (Stimulus), right?

    "If unemployment is around where it is today next November the Obama administration and Congress has a bigger problem on their hands than if they'd done nothing at all towards job creation."

    Is that a fair statement?  I don't know but I suspect there is some truth in it. Perception is everything in politics.

    Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

    by Scarce on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:24:23 AM PST

  •  Can we start making things again? (11+ / 0-)

    None of this sounds really likely to reverse the trend of importing way too much and exporting nearly nothing other than entertainment, bombs, and guns.  Do they really think that tax credits for creating jobs are going to make people stop using sweatshops in China to produce things?  We need to copy what Mexico did, and place extremely high tariffs on items imported from Asia.  Down there, you pay a lot more than we do in the U.S. for things like TVs and video games, but less than we do for things like food.  I think our economy would be a lot better off if we produced more here, raised the prices on imported junk that we don't really need, and lowered the prices on things that we do need.

  •  I'm thinking (0+ / 0-)

    with all this "jobs" activity tomorrow's numbers are going to suck.

    Why don't you try reading the rules, Shankopotamus?

    by bugscuffle on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:27:06 AM PST

  •  The goal to make this deficit neutral is (3+ / 0-)

    worrisome.  If it is deficit neutral it isn't stimulating the economy.  It makes me angry that if it is about jobs or health care the politicians are carefully counting each penny, but, bailouts for Wall Street or military expenses bring out the blank checks.

  •  Coincidally Romney is out with ten terrible (3+ / 0-)

    ideas on how to get more jobs. (stop the unions, stop cap-and-trade, feed the rich etc.)

    No doubt what that man is gonna run on in 2012:

    (Obama´s) failure to stem the unemployment tide should not have been a surprise. With no experience whatsoever in the world of employment and business formation, he had no compass to guide his path. Instead, he turned over much of his economic recovery agenda to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, themselves nearly as inexperienced in the private sector as he.

    Proud suscriber of DailyKos - love to see the site w/o ads!

    by Mariken on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:27:37 AM PST

    •  I read his ideas and NONE of them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      would have done anything for unemployment.

      It is just window dressing.

      Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

      by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:34:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  True..Romney's ideas awful.. (0+ / 0-)

        It would be feed the rich...trickle down economics.

        I think Romney has almost no chance to get the 2012 GOP nom. I think his passing MA HC will do him in..

        "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

        by joedemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:48:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Why are you interrupting the wall (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, kefauver, pamelabrown

    to wall Tiger Woods reporting with this unsexy news?  :)

  •  I'm glad to see this diary (7+ / 0-)

    and I hope it makes and stays on the rec list.

    This is THE MOST IMPORTANT issue facing this country right now.  If much more of the population becomes completely destitute and unable to afford shelter and food, it's hard to predict what will happen.  Extending unemployment benefits and COBRA assistance will go a long way towards keeping people minimally cared for.

    I hope this site stops navel-gazing long enough to champion this cause loudly until the Dems get it done.

  •  It's about damn time (4+ / 0-)

    that more be done to stimulate jobs.
    The stimulus pissed away too much on tax cuts.
    We see how little good they did us.
    Democrats should drum this fact home in 2010.
    I hope that this next bill isn't too little too late.

    -7.88/-4.41 "The blood sucking aristocracy stood aghast; terror stricken, they thought the day of retribution had come." - John Ferral, union leader

    by Interceptor7 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:43:29 AM PST

  •  300 billion over what time period? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CWalter, joedemocrat, LarryKrebbs

    disclaimer: I oppose the escalation and any contrary discussion of said escalation is just that.

    by terrypinder on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:43:54 AM PST

  •  Someone should send them all MB's story (14+ / 0-)

    Resurrect and Energize the Conservation Corps.

    I hope some thought goes into where jobs are needed the most, and a massive program to generate them.

    "If you're in a coalition and you're comfortable, you know it's not a broad enough coalition" Bernice Johnson Reagon

    by Denise Oliver Velez on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:47:29 AM PST

    •  Deoliver this is correct.. (8+ / 0-)

      That would be one way to create lots of jobs..

      We do need to get moving with energy conservation jobs. I've read things by Al Gore and Eric Schmidt about rebuilding the electric grid. This would give us a way to get solar energy from, say, AZ desert, to the rest of the country. Also, way to get wind energy from plains to rest of country.

      We also need to make sure these jobs are here in the U.S. I liked the Cash for Clunkers idea, but wish they would go to the auto companies and say listen this will help you but in exchange we want you to build more cars here. We need to ask the companies that benefit from these programs to put the money back into U.S. jobs and employees.

      We had a huge deficit in the 1930s and WWII. But one big difference was the money went to our own people. The WPA and other programs created almost all U.S. jobs. The WWII production was all in U.S factories.

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

      by joedemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:57:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hammer on them for High-Speed Rail (4+ / 0-)

    We should be calling them (I have been doing so for the last week) asking them to invest not in just more highways and roads, but in high-speed rail, public transit, etc.  Things that will help us out even after gas prices creep up again, and allow us to transition to cleaner energy sources.

  •  If this passes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xsonogall, caseyaaronsmith

    When will it go into effect? People are hurting are jobs are needed so badly. Especially in chicago.

  •  'Bout time (0+ / 0-)

    Nice to see Democrats getting down to basic Dem issues... whew!

    Torture: An act... specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering upon another person within his custody or physical control.

    by MsGrin on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:52:19 AM PST

  •  afghanistan will make this harder (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Everytime the democrats propose something domestically the Rs will say we do not have the
    money, we need the money for the war effort.

    Obama has screwed this up terribly.

    •  Actually the White House is talking with Congress (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, Pris from LA, kat68, xsonogall

      to use TARP funds for this.

      And who cares what the GOP has to say.  The Democrats have 60 Senators and thus this can pass.

      Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

      by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:11:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  How would the Rs explain using the TARP funds.... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CWalter, kat68, RinaX

      ...for it?  They'd rather use the leftover TARP funds for the war instead of jobs?  That would be a good move if they want to kill all their momentum.

      The Rs will definitely obstruct, but they wouldn't use the war as an excuse.  They'd say something like socialism or these should be tax cuts or something.

      I'd like to believe Obama's decision on Afghanistan does not affect everything, unless of course some people want to try and tie everything on that decision because they now think Obama is some evil warhawk and should go down in flames for an evil evil move and so we should remind everyone how stupid he is by saying Obama screwed <topic of the day> up because he is sending more troops to Afghanistan.

      "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

      by xsonogall on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:12:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Need Fed law to change States UC restrictions (5+ / 0-)

    on UC for those returning to college. PA and many states immediately cut off UC payments the day you register for training schools or college classes - and Financial Aid is based upon your last year's income data - preventing many from getting adequate financial aid.

    This is Win-Win. People are training for new careers - and UC pays Federal Income Taxes.

    Come on Congress - do something decent for a change for people - not banks or insurance companies.

    "People ask, is there one word that you have more faith in than any other word, ...I'd say its Participation." - Pete Seeger

    by PAbluestater on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 05:57:26 AM PST

  •  Thanks for breaking it down to date. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    revsue, PAbluestater

    It's just pathetic how these supposed representatives of the people get billions funneled off to fucking stupid, self-serving and tightwad bankers and finally are thinking about getting something to small businesses that they can write home about.

    I hope whatever money they come up with is spread out over a variety of areas like you have diagrammed.

    A long time ago, men gave away their power. To other men: princes, kings, wizards, generals and high priests. -Carlin

    by gereiztkind on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:01:20 AM PST

  •  Subsidize clean energy plants (3+ / 0-)

    Pass a renewable ten year thingy (tax credit, direct payment, I don't care what) that subsidizes any zero-emission power plant to bring the cost fo energy down to a level competitive with the dirtiest ugliest cheap coal plant, provided the parts for energy production are US manufactured - i.e. US Solar panels, US windmills, US wave energy capture devices.

    It'll help develop a US clean energy manufacturing industry and encourage new power plants that don't pollute.

    Progrsssive -> Progress; Conservative -> Con

    by nightsweat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:04:01 AM PST

  •  (Insanity) Your going to spend 300 billion (6+ / 0-)

    dollars to reduce the unemployment rate from 10.2 to 9.5.  That is insane, that is $500,000 per job.

  •  Put a surtax on incomes over (8+ / 0-)

    $1 million to pay for this in order to encourage the Republicans to scream even louder.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:05:15 AM PST

  •  Another idea: More money for Fed jobs in agencies (4+ / 0-)

    Put more funds into each of the Administrations various departments (HUD, Forest Service, HHS, Transportation, etc etc) solely to hire more people. And tell them to get going on hiring...IMMEDIATELY. Not sure what the amount should be, but at least 100 million dollars per department. That could get a lot of people going to work with decent wages - and surely each department has a need for more workers. Some agencies, like the Forest Service and Interior, could take on a whole lot of people on upgrading parks and forest service facilities, all of which have run down. I'll bet there are many jobs just waiting to be funded in every agency.

    •  Forest Service needs to pay MORE. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pam from Calif, Pris from LA

      Forest rangers are woefully underpaid.

      I had a friend who got a degree in park management, and couldn't find a job paying more than $12,000 a year.

      More jobs, yes, but better paid ones as well.

      "The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." -- Mark Twain

      by Brooke In Seattle on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:50:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's bout time - they're needed! (5+ / 0-)

    larger image

    TO SEE this Dark Trend to Hopelessness, currently happening in a neighborhood near you!
    Geography of a Recession - Animation -- Just Click Play

    the story

    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act -- George Orwell

    by jamess on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:08:58 AM PST

  •  end overseas job transfer tax credit (5+ / 0-)

    If people really wanted to have an impact on jobs creation then ending the overseas job tax credit would actually do that and not be some fluff legislation.  I have seen first hand companies make decisions based on this tax credit to not create jobs in the US.

  •  Good news. I hope they get it done (5+ / 0-)

    quickly...and I can't wait to see the Party of NO vote against jobs for all Americans. I'm sure that will help them win in 2010.

    And I finished this letter with unshakable faith that the dream will be fulfilled for this generation, and preserved and enlarged for generations to come.

    by Elise on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:18:27 AM PST

  •  Raise import tariffs (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle

    and include outsourced labor in the imports category.

    Now that you've gone Galt, I get your stuff.

    by pucklady on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:19:54 AM PST

  •  I support some of these measures, but... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the tax credit for new hires seems like a bad idea to me. How about a payroll tax cut in instead?

  •  Using TARP funds to pay for it? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA, ruascott

    That's as nonsensical as Ben Nelson's idea of selling war bonds instead of borrowing money.  The TARP funds were a loan, not an expenditure.

    Not that I mind the subterfuge, if that's what it takes for these losers to pass something, but it just goes to show how gutless they are.

    And this is less than half what their opening bid should be.  If we're lucky, we'll wind up with $100 billion in spending (including no aid to the state governments that are about to collapse) and $150 billion in tax cuts.

    Mistah, looks like we have a man like Hoibert Hoover again.

    •  I think that much of the TARP funds were not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pris from LA

      targetted ie tax cuts.

      Instead of tax cuts that money should have been used for more infrastructure spending.

      For every dollar spent on tax cuts one gets only 91% improvement (out of 100%) in the economy but every dollar spent on infrastructure spending it improves the economy by 151%.

      Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

      by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:23:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are excatly right (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pris from LA, lr3921

      The Wash Post wrote an article on this a couple weeks ago, and I couldn't believe how ignorant they were. TARP was never counted by CBO as spending, except the portion that was reserved for losses (which we won't know for years until they liquidate all the assets).

      The other argument was to take TARP money and pay down the debt! What are these people smoking?

      That's like borrowing money from your bank, to pay off a loan to THE SAME BANK....and pretending like you paid off debt.

  •  Wait until it's watered down... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    This is just the starting point, wait until the Conservadems are finished with it.  GOP will vote against it en masse because they want tax cuts in it.

    When is the last time the Obama Administration has pleasantly surprised you - Made you think to yourself "Wow, I didn't think they had that in them"?

    by Jonze on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:39:35 AM PST

  •  Payroll Tax Cut (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kefauver, Pris from LA, agito

    The simplest way to do this, and probably the most politically popular as well.

    •  That may happen too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pris from LA

      There are many ideas on the table.

      Obama 7/09: "Don't bet against us" (unless the Dems screw it up).

      by Drdemocrat on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:24:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  agreed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pris from LA

      It's killing me that noone seems to be doing any focus on simply lowering the costs of having an american employee. Lowering the payroll taxes, or offering rebates for w2's filed, is the simplest and most direct solution.

      •  Except that those proposals simply deplete (0+ / 0-)

        the social security revenues and line the pockets of owners and executives.  Offering rebates for W-2's is like the old WIN and jobs credits, which simply increased employee turnover because companies would hire folks, pay them 4200 or so, fire them and hire somebody else for the same jopb, etc., etc.

        It is not the costs of hiring an employee that cripple us, but the costs of paying managers and executives ludicrous salaries exponentially in excess of any value they add to the process.

        "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

        by enhydra lutris on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:45:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Makes sense (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pris from LA

      Businesses that are having a hard time holding on to employees will have a better shot. Ones that want to hire will be able to do so without having to worry as much about the impact on the bottom line.

  •  The Infrastructure and States Aid disappointed me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, Pris from LA

    when I saw the sum in your title.

    As long as states like Oregon, Rhode Island, Kentucky and to a smaller extent Michigan fall off people's radar, I find it hard to believe their state governments will make do with this amount and a nod.

    Furthermore, infrastructure is something I and bloggers like Yglesias were harping on a year ago, but there's much more that I don't think falls in that category. Weed removal and habitat restoration? Americorps? (Which was previously expanded by the Administration some.)

    (-7.00, -6.21) Jobs, Liberty, Peace.

    by Nulwee on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 06:46:42 AM PST

  •  Not that I'm opposed to any of those ideas (3+ / 0-)

    but what's really needed is a direct federal hiring program such as WPA or CCC.

  •  Regarding this statement (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wu ming, Pris from LA

    "Sending more aid to cash-strapped state and local governments. States are writing their 2010-11 budgets, and federal aid included in February's stimulus package runs out in 2010. Without another bailout, they might be forced to cut spending or raise taxes, hindering the recovery."

    I am taking bets that secessionist Texas, that bastion of independence, and anti government rhetoric will suck up these dollars like a dry sponge in a swimming pool.

    No being has inherent power, only the illusion of power granted by others who similarly have none.

    by Mark701 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:14:38 AM PST

  •  What about strengthening workers rights? (3+ / 0-)

    Is there anything about passing the Employee Free Choice Act?  Anything about strengthening workers abilities to form unions?

    Passing an employment bill will probably help, but the long term solution is giving workers power--not only in their jobs, but political power.

  •  GOP will be against it... (0+ / 0-)

    As will Lieberman because bad jobs numbers is their only shot in 2010.  And Lieberman just is out to screw over the Democrats at every turn.  

    When is the last time the Obama Administration has pleasantly surprised you - Made you think to yourself "Wow, I didn't think they had that in them"?

    by Jonze on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:26:35 AM PST

  •  remove 401k withdrawal penalty (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, Brooke In Seattle, marleycat

    This is one of the president's campaign promises that has been forgotten

    Patriotism consists not in waving the flag, but in striving that our country shall be righteous as well as strong. ~James Bryce

    by california keefer on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:27:32 AM PST

  •  How about unemployment for those who didn't (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, wu ming, Jagger, Pris from LA, Loose Fur

    qualify because they were part-time or contract workers, and for those whose unemployment ran out in 2007 before they started the extensions?

    How about tax credits for hiring a long-term unemployed person?

    How about jobs for the disabled and for people over 50 who can't do construction?

    I see a little bit of help in these plans, but not enough to put eight million and counting back to work at jobs that pay a living wage and offer benefits.

    There also needs to be a provision to change the hiring practices in this country. No more credit score checking, no eliminating candidates from contention just because they have holes in their resumes, and if you've been unemployed more than a year, you should get preference for any job you are qualified for. Otherwise, there's just going to be a bunch of job-hopping by those already employed, and those who need help most aren't going to get it.

    There should also be a provision for direct-pay on government contracts, so that the middle-men skimmers can't take their cut before hiring someone at a living wage.

    Of course, these things will not happen, so when all these jobs are filled, there will most likely still be massive unemployment in this country.

    "The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." -- Mark Twain

    by Brooke In Seattle on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:29:43 AM PST

  •  Isn't it time for another unemployment extention? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA
  •  tell them to stop and get healthcare thru and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    then restore compettion in america. this will do more for the economy than giving ge and haliburton huge contracts to dole out a stipend to the middleclass

  •  Wait a minute... TARP (0+ / 0-)

    was a lending program, not a spending program. The only part that counted as "spending" against the deficit, was the portion allocated for lending losses. I don't see how they can use TARP money and say they are "paying" for it.

    •  my statement was incomplete (0+ / 0-)

      TARP also spent money buying illiquid assets, which they still hold to this day, and are slowly selling off the securities. They just announced they expect to raise over $3 bil by selling warrants related to Capital One, JP Morgan and others.

      But the point is, it is disengious to say that by using "unspent" TARP money on a jobs bill or anything else, they are "paying" for it. They are not.

  •  Trade agreements, outsourcing (0+ / 0-)

    Tariffs.  They work for China.  China has 9% growth with tariffs.

    American Heart Association: Diet Soda can cause type 2 Diabetes.

    by jeffrey789 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 08:26:31 AM PST

  •  Is there any chance this bill can be passed (0+ / 0-)

    before year-end? Or for the administration to use TARP money without going back to Congress for approval? If we wait for the Senate to move at their usual slow speed, we won't get a jobs bill until April.

  •  The Name of the Bill (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The name of the bill should be "Investment in the National Equity"

    Give it a name that leads everyone to think of building the US

  •  I find the proposal of a corporate tax break (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...for companies that add jobs to be inappropriate and downright offensive.  It's just another mechanism for transferring wealth to rich people.

    •  and worse (0+ / 0-)

      and worse some companies will abuse it by firing and then (re)hiring people at lower wages.

      better to just rebate companies that are already employing americans so they can have and advantage over the competition and expand (and hire more americans)

  •  Education Reform is the number 1 issue (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    the fact that our pathetic schools continue to pump out young people that are not prepared to compete in the 21st century is the biggest reason unemployment for this age group is the highest in the country.

    Older Americans may not have jobs, but due to lack of education, young Americans do not have futures.

    •  It's not quite a lack of education (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tmo, revsue, Pris from LA

      it's bad teaching and overreliance on standardized testing. My son is ten years old. He goes to public school. He attends school from 8 am to 3 pm. He is then assigned approximately 3-5 hours of homework per night. He sleeps, like most kids, between 10 and 11 hours.

      That's all of his waking time, without meals.

      I'm honestly enraged with the way his program functions. Every night, he is required to do busy work, reams of busy work, and endless reports on pointless topics.

      My grandmother was a well-respected educational researcher for a chunk of her career, and the kind of work he is doing runs counter to all that works and is good.

      He's just being prepped for testing, not to critically think.

      I like that he studies algebra, Spanish, Greek Literature, and clarinet in his public school. But it would take me 1/2 the time to teach it to him myself.

      Part of the problem is the stubborn refusal of some older teachers to just retire. Their methods are not suited to contemporary realities (his teacher falls into this category). Larger class sizes also deeply hurt kids. They don't pay attention in class, and there's nothing to be done about this except relearn everything with them later, at home.

      In terms of college, my husband is a Professor, and the incoming freshman, largely from public schools, are woefully underequipped to handle the most basic need in college: 1. critical thinking and 2. independent research methods.

      Indeed, there is a lack of education, but this is because of a lack of good educators, which is due to a lack of oversight of those educators. Measures like No Child Left Behind and other testing services make for regressive oversight, moreover.

      We have a big problem, and I've no idea how to solve it.

      "Rule Forty-two. All persons more than a mile high to leave the court." - Alice in Wonderland

      by mahakali overdrive on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:06:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Good news, but it should be larger. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    If main street is important, then this bill should equal the one given away to Wall Wtreet by Bernanke!

    Good news nonetheless...

  •  Rather see more support for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    entrepreneurial startups.

    Government projects are handed out to connected contractors through rigged procurement processes.

    We are trying to get some work with the government - we actually have had to hire a lobbiest to help. It is shocking to see how much corruption and inbreeding goes on...It is a dirty business. Apparently, merit is not a factor in being awarded a contract.

    Basically, if you do not have long-time ex-government folks on your team you do not have a chance. Oh, political contributions help as well.

  •  Obama M.I.A. on Jobs ? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA, agito

    The administration SHOULD be taking the lead on the jobs issue.  Some proposals should have been coming, but it seems they are taking a laid back approach. Many people are suffering out here, and down right angry and frustrated.  Recovery alone from the Great Recession will not create enough jobs for those lost them and for keeping up with a growing workforce.  And what we got is a Jobs Summit ??!!

  •  Is this the second stimulus bill very (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Pris from LA

    cleverly gift wrapped in Americas bi-partisan need?

    Hope so. If so, it is positively Machiavellian.

  •  The jobs thing is related to the war thing... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA, enhydra lutris

    Stop the war, create more jobs. Period. Many more.

    by scorpiorising on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:06:30 AM PST

  •  just make sure the states get enough (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    We need to make sure the states get more then enough to keep providing services and maybe actually expand services to meet real needs in their communities. Giving tax credits to businesses to hire people is all well and good, but if consumers are not consuming like they used to businesses really have very little need to hire people and will probably not hire someone to stand around just so they can take advantage of a tax credit.

    Tax credits are one of the least efficient ways to stimulate the economy, but our neoliberal Democrats are obsessed with tax credits.

    I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class, especially since I rule!

    by jbou on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:08:00 AM PST

  •  states (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, andgarden, Pris from LA

    $150 billion budget shortfall in fiscal 2011, has called for $75 billion in federal aid for states.

    Why not make up for the whole shortfall? I hate this shit. We short change the states at the expense of social programs but we are more then willing to hand out huge tax credits to the private sector. This pisses me off.

    I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class, especially since I rule!

    by jbou on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:10:48 AM PST

  •  Cue Republicans whingeing about the deficit (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    In 3 . . . 2 . . . 1

    I'm a liberal. I think OUR rights are more important than YOUR fears.

    by slippytoad on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:24:20 AM PST

  •  Let Me See (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    $135B left over TARP money, according to Geithner last May. . .plus. . .
    $45B in re-apid TARP money from BoA. . .plus. . .
    $1.5B ditto from Chrysler. . .plus. . .
    $72.3B ditto from other "borrowers". . .equals

    $253.8B TARP funds ready to pay for the proposal.  At least.

    "Give me but one firm spot to stand, and I will move the earth." -- Archimedes

    by Limelite on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:24:59 AM PST

  •  Shortest distance between two points (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA, enhydra lutris

    It's time our Congress stop bailing out a financial industry that has no interest in doing normal banking and start making loans to small businesses itself or nationalize some banks and start doing it.

    It's also time to stop worrying about trickle down theories and just begin to look around at what needs fixing and then start fixing it.  We've got plenty of bridges, roads, buildings, schools, that need to be repaired.

    Someone has to grease the wheels of new business and our infrastructure needs rebuilding so let's just get money out there and start doing it.

    Meanwhile, let's tax those who have made off with great wealth and are doing nothing but planning their next trip to the palm islands in Dubai and have them pay for it.

    Our system is broke.  Our economy doesn't work the way it's structured now so let's just get on with providing jobs, creating new industries, and fixing things in this country.

  •  politically acceptable, total misuse of funds (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA, enhydra lutris

      This is politically acceptable but a total misallocation of precious funds.

      The one question you have to ask yourself is this - "How does this play with $100/bbl oil? $200? How does it work during an oil shock?"

      9/11 was a wake up call for us to get down off our high (energy) horse or pay the price. We chose to try to make off with the last supergiant oil field, the one beneath Kurdish Iraq, and we've failed.

     Give me $300 billion and you're getting a national electric rail network ($100B) and the rest will go to providing single payer health care. These two steps would free Americans to reinvent themselves for a new, lower energy world.

     Instead corporate delusions of grandeur and vested interests that have no business model for a world with declining energy and climate resources vote a minimal payout to voters and thusly a few more quarters of life support for themselves, having completely run out of methods to loot the treasury directly.

      Maybe it's time to just give up and see about getting a few acres for a doomstead, eh?

    "Not dead ... yet. Still have ... things to do." -Liet Kynes

    by Stranded Wind on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 09:40:19 AM PST

  •  Emerson Electric moving overseas.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    On November 11, David N. Farr, Chairman, CEO and President of Emerson Electric Co., announced at the Baird 2009 Industrial Conference in Chicago that President Obama has succeeded in chasing his multi-billion dollar industry right out of the U.S.A. Why? Onerous regulation, high taxes, and the over $1 trillion Obama debt should be reason enough for any business to consider shutting down U.S. facilities and seeking greener pastures overseas says Farr.

    The federal government is "doing everything in [its] manpower [and] capability to destroy U.S. manufacturing," says David Farr, chairman and CEO of Emerson Electric Co., in a presentation at the Baird 2009 Industrial Conference in Chicago Ill., on Nov. 11. In comments reported by Bloomberg, Farr added that companies will continue adding jobs in China and India because they are "places where people want the products and where the governments welcome you to actually do something. I am not going to hire anybody in the United States. I’m moving. They are doing everything possible to destroy jobs."

    During his slide show on the state of Emerson’s business, Farr noted that the "unprecedented job loss experienced in this recession will result in a much slower U.S. recovery" and the federal government is making matters worse. The slide reports that the job loss this time is by many magnitudes worse than previous recessions. Noted are job losses from several recessions: 1980 with 1 million jobs lost; 1982 with 2.8 million; 1990 with 1.5 million; 2001 with 2.7 million. Finally Farr notes that we’ve seen a whopping 7.3 million jobs lost thus far (and climbing) in this 2008-2009-2010 recession.

    •  That CEO is completely full of shit and a coward (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jagger, Pris from LA

      What new regulation and what new tax specifically tipped the scales to the point Emerson can't manufacture in the USA? The $1 trillion Obama debt is projected, not yet happened. This a-hole acts like Emerson was going to pay the debt.

      Since he is such a big fan of China why doesn't he pack up his household and family and move to his ideal country where he can drink their dirty water, breathe their dirty air, eat their dirty food, and share the streets with billions of poor people.  

    •  M-Audio shutting down US operations... (0+ / 0-)

      ...and moving to either Russia or China. A good friend of mine works there, and thanks to the WARN Act, got his notice recently that his job was going bye-bye in June 2010.

      Of course, the high muckety-mucks in the company are getting moved to cushy jobs at Digidesign/Avid.

      The next Single Payer Happy Hour is 12/18/2009 because of the Winter Holidays.
      "Father, father...we don't need to escalate."

      by Pris from LA on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:43:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Extended Unemployment Not Helping Where Needed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, Pris from LA

    Re: Extended Unemployment Not Helping Where Needed

    The Third Extension Benefit Bill passed in November was said to be helping long term unemployed workers, especially in high unemployment States. I live in California, but am being disavowed benefits now that my 2009 claim expired (on Oct. 31, 2009) because of the following Federal law on the books:

    Per CA EDD:
    But because the Federal Law (The Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008, Pub.L. No. 110-252 (June 30, 2008) as amended by Pub.L. No. 110-449 (November 21, 2008) prohibits the payments of benefits because D.1. You do not have earnings in excess of 40 times your weekly benefit amount of 1.5 times the highest quarter in the base period of your regular claim dated 4/5/2009. (Pub.L. No. 110-252, 4001 d 2; CUIC 4552 e).

    I had an unemployment claim dating from 4/5/2008. I worked some during this unemployment period.  I received the first extension and three weeks of the second extension during this first claim, then the State automatically started a new, second claim dated 4/5/2009 based on earnings from January through February of 2009.

    I have called at least six times throughout the summer to enquire if I was still eligible for an extension after my 4/5/2009 claim expired and was told Yes by EDD represenatives over the phone. On November 17, 2009, I received notice in the mail by EDD that I was eligible for unemployment extended benefits. On November 20, 2009 I received a notice that I was ineligible.

    This is a horrible law that needs to be undone. I am now not on the States list of the unemployed (my benefits expired 10/31/09), but will soon (one month probably) be one of the States estimated homeless.

    We, people like myself, were misinformed by the State EDD phone representatives, the State EDD mail and now find ourselves helpless. A kind EDD rep said many are calling with the same issue.

    It seems this Unemployment Extension only applies to the newly unemployed, or those who were able to find work while unemployed; is it fair that in a State like California where work is so scare, we are left with no extended benefits?

    Kathleen Heckman
    2212 26th Street, #5
    Sacramento, CA 95818

    the right to be left alone- justice louis brandeis

    by echoes4444 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:05:53 AM PST

  •  Has anyone seen a dollar from the first jobs bill (0+ / 0-)

    I think it all went to the states and they spent it on their state workers payrolls. Nothing got built. No one got hired. The states were business as usual.

    In this diary about a second jobs bill there is no mention of the impact of the first jobs bill. Could be there was no improvement to speak of?

  •  I don't see a lot of that as creating jobs (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    For example, unemployment benefits, while necessary, do not create jobs directly.

    I'd increase the direct jobs program to $6B, minimum. Give people jobs doing anything useful.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:22:03 AM PST

  •  Curtail the use of H1-B & tourist visa IT workers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pris from LA

    The population of India is more than 1.1 billion.  50% of that population is under 25.  Their top 10% is larger than our K-12 system.  Our open door immigration policy is killing us.  Our edonomy is not large enough to support the young Indian workforce and our workforce.  This is not about hating immigrants or immigration. There should be no hatred. It is about having an immigration policy that operates in financial reality.  The H1-B program is supposed to supply workers when Americans are not available.  It is not supposed to be a way to replace American workers.

  • jobs summit live streaming (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    There will be live streaming for this event, which is supposed to start at any minute.

  •  Give small businesses with under 5 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, mofembot

    employees a $40,000 grant to hire an extra full-time employee.

    I know a lot of small business people whose are in the Catch 22 where if they could get one more employee, their business could earn more money. But they can't get another employee because they don't have the money, and the people there are already at capacity with their time.

    Times, hard. People, starving. Foodbanks, empty. Bring them food, or donate now. (I'm on Twitter now)

    by Muskegon Critic on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 10:53:13 AM PST

  •  thanks for the info! (0+ / 0-)

    I can make use of this.

  •  Sounds good to me. (0+ / 0-)

    Keep in mind only a quarter of the stim has even been spent. This PURELY focused jobs bill along with the stim could give us just the type of boon we might need to not only bring unemployment down, but to bring unemployment for some Dems in congress from occuring at all. Even that wouldn't be such a bad thing for some Dems.

    "I don't want a line in the Sand lines can be moved. They can be blown away. I want a six foot trench carved into granite."

    by theone718 on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 12:14:33 PM PST

  •  The president needs real working people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    to direct the jobs program— preferably people with union backgrounds and proven track records of dealing with large industrial and/or public works projects. We don't need more pro-bank, pro-upper mgmt MBA-types getting their hands on even more stimulus money.

    Book excerpts: nonlynnear; other writings: mofembot.

    by mofembot on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 01:47:29 PM PST

jbou, social democrat, JekyllnHyde, fladem, Terri, tmo, PLS, Paleo, askew, Trendar, bob in ny, whataboutbob, wytcld, sara seattle, Jim in Chicago, frisco, missLotus, sja, mkfarkus, barath, Calprof, Cedwyn, lirtydies, artebella, wader, Quege, hangingchad, danthrax, Dallasdoc, missliberties, pointsoflight, Chicago Lulu, greenapple, GN1927, lcrp, snowbird42, jim bow, Limelite, bloomer 101, radarlady, PAbluestater, DianeNYS, PBen, kefauver, terrypinder, Brooke In Seattle, Laurence Lewis, Pam from Calif, Frank Palmer, The Raven, coolbreeze, jct, begone, SoulCatcher, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, vigilant meerkat, sherlyle, cybersaur, koNko, buhdydharma, fou, NBBooks, global citizen, A Siegel, Libby Shaw, Preston S, el cid, max stirner, profh, Stripe, revgerry, markthshark, Nulwee, Aaa T Tudeattack, DBunn, ammasdarling, Noor B, Mithridates, Fredly, meowmissy, Loudoun County Dem, dmh44, moodyinsavannah, Dartagnan, Positronicus, Jimdotz, malharden, twistedflatcat, bobswern, jnhobbs, Jack the R, leonard145b, JML9999, oxon, roycej, chicago minx, W T F, MKinTN, ShadowSD, DraftChickenHawks, rontun, Cordwainer, OleHippieChick, mamamedusa, vkbaker, elwior, ajr111240, jamess, royce, smartdemmg, Ladyhawk, mofembot, the new, bob zimway, DixieDishrag, Athenocles, dont think, blueinsight, Diogenes2008, Pris from LA, Bule Betawi, cybrestrike, meatwad420, snackdoodle, Are We There Yet, bsmechanic, be the change you seek, Stranded Wind, Partisan Progressive, kat68, Patch Adam, Yalin, Daily Activist, lookit, bfitzinAR, Corneliusmingus, hyper, Denise Oliver Velez, sherijr, northernlights, mahakali overdrive, carmenjones, math4barack, smileycreek, swaminathan, hillgiant, Jampacked, LaughingPlanet, bullyness, fidellio, TheWesternSun, elsibiades, NY brit expat, ItsSimpleSimon, Mariken, DrFitz, sharonsz, addisnana, gereiztkind, MsGrin, around the way girl, BrowniesAreGood, KathyfromOhio, nicethugbert, michiganlefty, platypus216, Amayi, Mistral Wind, PAJ in Ohio, FightingRegistrar, Jed Lewison, Haf2Read, marleycat, Muskegon Critic, theone718, JohnInOregon, floridablue, lizard people, randomfacts, Wonk Hussein, KingofSpades, disillusionedbabyboomer, rmrice, thejoshuablog, SouthernLiberalinMD, MichaelNY, johnnr2

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site