The Washington Post reported (11/5/09) that some Democrats are “questioning whether they should emphasize job creation over some of the more ambitious items on the president’s agenda.” A couple paragraphs later, reporters Michael Shear and Paul Kane elaborate:
Moderate and conservative Democrats took a clear signal from Tuesday’s voting, warning that the results prove that independent voters are wary of Obama’s far-reaching proposals and mounting spending, as well as the growing federal debt.
The implication that “job creation” is somehow at odds with “mounting spending” and “ambitious” or “far-reaching” government proposals is a another example of the neo-Hooverism that corporate reporters seem to instinctively subscribe to. In reality, spending money is one of the basic tools governments have for creating jobs during a recession–and cutting government spending is one of the surest ways to make that recession deeper.
It’s worth noting that none of the sources actually quoted in the article makes the case that cutting federal spending would be a good way of creating jobs.
The Washington Post is just another shill for corporate powers that be. In fact, they all are, without exception.
It will take FDR-type conditions for the other side to concede that the guvmint can do something out of the public purse to … create jobs, now, deficits be damned if it’s an emergency.
Uh, we’re there. Teabaggers notwithstanding. I think they would vote to fire all firefighters in their neighborhood if their pundits told them that “firefighters are socialists”.
We need solidarity now! That means spending on social programs that bring people closer together. Volunteermatch.org, for example, can provide 198% return on investment to the community in social services.
All cutting spending will do will make the government less effective at enforcing justice. And when you don’t have justice, things fall apart.
Okay, Jim, we agree with your argument on the merits. Just one problem: there IS no job creation despite the spending. You can’t make companies hire people; they’re not. They’re hoarding cash “to weather the storm”. And apparently you can’t make banks lend to spur job growth, because they’re not. SO, your argument accepted, please tell us what’s missing in your view.
The best item that happened in the 1930’s Great Depression was the CCCs. Each received $30 a month, $25 of which went home and they left refurbished trails and public rest stops built with stone that still serve us. We, again, need work on infrastucture badly. For the adults we had WPA. Both were worth much more than the pittance they earned.