I know that it seems easier and more straightforward to just direct funds via government to create jobs, but in order for the economy to grow we have to trust that the private market will create them and let them do that.
The private sector is screwed right now and is already very loosely taxed. The rich bastards you claim create jobs are sitting on Trillions of liquid assets and doing nothing with it.
Why do you suppose that is? Don't you think that being rich and being greedy, they wouldn't just sit on so much money? Wouldn't they want to use it to make more money for themselves? So why aren't they?
The private sector has abandoned the USA and moved to newly lucrative places like China, India, Brazil, Canada, and Australia.
Ah. So you do understand why? It's because rich people invest their money in places where their investments are more likely to be lucrative. So isn't the obvious solution to make the USA a more lucrative place to invest? At the very least, shouldn't we entertain the possibility that doing things that make said investment less lucrative
might just have something to do with those rich people not creating jobs?
The only way to get hem to want to come back is to get people spending money again, with 9% of the population unemployed, and likely another 9+% of the population Under Employed people are not spending money, and since money isn't moving jobs aren't either.
Consumption really isn't the problem though. I know that lots of people keep saying it is, but that's a symptom of the problem, not the cause. It's kind of a chicken and egg issue, right? If you employ more people, they'll have more money and buy stuff, which allows the business community to continue employing them. But that only works if they're employed making stuff that other people are buying
. I really can't stress this enough. It's why I keep harping about "productive jobs".
If you pay people to do stuff that you nor I want or are willing to pay for (the result, not the salary itself), then the job wont be self sustaining and we wont see economic recovery as a result of it existing. If those people are employed making stuff other people buy (for example), then there is much greater economic effect. Because not only do we get the economic effects of their income being spent in the economy, but we get the effect of their labor as something others can spend their incomes on.
I just keep trying to explain this concept on this board, and it feels like I'm just not getting it through. And the reason why the private sector is important is because private sector jobs (especially those unburdened by government subsidies and whatnot) are much much more likely to result in those "productive jobs" that we need than the public sector is.
Fix Consumer Confidence, that is what drives the economy, a healthy middle class means a healthy country.
Those aren't connected to each other though. Not directly. Are you aware that in the 2010 to early 2011 time frame consumption rates were pretty healthy? As a result of pumping money into the demand side of the economy for a couple years, we were artificially keeping consumption at decent levels. But as I (and most conservatives) predicted, once the money runs out, the effect disappears. It's not sustainable.
You need useful productivity to match consumption demand. And when this happens as a result of jobs being created in the free market, those two will tend to match each other nicely.
Right now the American Middle class is screwed and disappearing at a fast rate. That is why you need to make jobs, so these people will spend money.
This is a much broader and longer term statement though. I'll point out again that very few people working for small businesses are what we'd call middle class. Focusing our efforts on creating jobs for the sake of being able to point to a number and say we've made things better just seems counter productive. This jobs bill will create some jobs. But most of the jobs it'll create are low income subsistence level jobs (except for the union jobs it'll create as well, but that's another subject).
They wont last. And they certainly wont help the middle class grow.
Private sector spending is a joke, and it always has been.
What is "private sector spending"? The private sector seeks to make a profit. It does this by hiring people to do things which produce a greater economic value than the cost of the labor itself. The net result is that people have jobs, the government gets some tax revenue, and the economy grows. It's not about how much money it "spends", and it's bizarre that you'd even use that phrase. It suggests you really have no clue what the role of the private sector is and are treating everything through the lens of public spending.
That's *not* normal. The idea that you should spend money to create jobs is not normal. Jobs should make money, not cost it.