It is Inherently Impossible for Government to Create Jobs

Big government can not create jobs but it can remove the barriers for the private sector to create jobs of value. Lower the corporate tax rate; America has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Doing so would enable companies to expand, hire and be more competitive in the world market. In fact, don’t stop there. Lower income tax rates to free up individuals to invest. But Obama’s Marxist agenda won’t allow for that since the goal is to grow federal government and dependency of its citizens upon it. It is ridicules to think we can spend out way out of debt. Insulting to be fed such nonsense. Instead, instill in persons to become self-reliant; not to become slaves to an entitlement system. Beware of the man; he hates our system and is bent on destroying it. [Fedup_11]

Cut taxes and get the hell out of the way of the productive Americans. Right now we are telling the kids the future is in the government. That will be our downfall as a country. The future has always been in the American people who produce, strive, and struggle for a better life. Not those who want to do the minimum and have the government fill in the rest. [Tom]

It is crazy to think that a deficit is good. Is it a good thing that our country is dependent on China buying our debt? China knows that we are dependent on them buying our debt, so they have manipulated their currency, driving the cost of their goods down, which makes it unaffordable for American businesses to compete domestically and globally with the goods that come out of China. Not only is China driving the cost of their goods down, the cost of our goods are rising because of the inflation that our central bank has created by printing money to fund our massive debt and all the spending to keep all of our government programs afloat. The federal deficit will increase under a job creation initiative that will cost one trillion dollars. Why not let the private sector create jobs for one trillion dollars cheaper (for free). To create tax revenue through job creation, jobs should be created through the private sector. That is done with less government interference and their crippling regulations and taxes. Jobs will generate revenue, cutting spending will reduce our 16 trillion dollar deficit, and a reduced deficit will secure the future of our country and children.

If the government spends money to create jobs, the government decides where the new jobs will be. This is an opportunity for government officials to play favorites and return political favors. I am not (few of us are) in line for political favors. When the government reduces taxes on businesses, the marketplace decides where the jobs will be. This is an opportunity for businesses to adjust to the economy of the marketplace. Every taxpayer (including me) is part of the marketplace. I put my faith in the marketplace to restore the economy. Those roads, sidewalks, etc. are paid for with OUR money, The government is our hired help in that situation. And transportation, at least interstate transportation, is a Constitutional provision. There are legitimate Government expenditures and there are those that are tolerated, and those that are enacted or attempted that have no business being run by the Government. Health Care Reform falls in the last. The States have the governmental powers not delegated to the Federal system according to the Constitution. [Libraryjim]

It is the production of goods and non-government services which people need or desire that builds an economy. Government does not produce goods. Government functions as a regulator over every aspect of our lives and redistributer of wealth from one group to another.

Cut taxes and get the hell out of the way of the productive Americans. Right now we are telling the kids the future is in the government. That will be our downfall as a country. The future has always been in the American people who produce, strive, and struggle for a better life. Not those who want to do the minimum and have the government fill in the rest. [Jim K]

The Great Society is coming to fruition. When the government is determined to be "all things to all people" and the people accept that this is OK and acceptable behavior, the end result looks more like socialist Europe (no constitution, no individual rights). Will the government argue the next step to save our country is to abolish the Constitution to save the entitlement state? Let's hope not or we will be ruled by a dictator/King.

Obama vows job creation without adding to deficit

February 12, 2013

AP - President Barack Obama is urging a divided Congress to boost job creation and strengthen the middle class through a package of government-backed proposals.

In his State of the Union address, Obama is calling for increasing the federal minimum wage, spending more to fix the nation's roads and bridges, and expanding early childhood education.

The president is also pledging to cut the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan in half within a year.
Obama says his proposals would not increase the deficit "by a single dime." But with unemployment persistently high and consumer confidence falling, he is pressing a progressive case for Washington's role in reigniting the economy.

Pledging to revive a "rising, thriving middle class," President Barack Obama promised Tuesday night to create solid new jobs without raising the federal deficit. He's calling for a "smarter government" but not a bigger one.

In excerpts released ahead of his State of the Union address, Obama called job creation his "North Star" and implored a divided Congress to center its work on attracting more jobs to the U.S., equipping Americans to compete for those positions and making sure hard work leads to a decent living.

"It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country — the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, or who you love," Obama said.

The president said his proposals to increase spending on manufacturing, infrastructure and clean-energy technologies would be fully paid for, though he did not specify in the excerpts how he would offset the cost of his proposals.

"Nothing I'm proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime," Obama said. "It's not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth."

In focusing his annual address on jobs and the deficit, the president is underscoring the degree to which the economy still threatens to disrupt his broader second-term agenda. Despite marked improvements since he took office four years ago, the unemployment rate is still hovering around 8 percent and consumer confidence has slipped.

White House officials said Obama was offering an outline for job creation, though much of his blueprint apparently includes elements Americans have heard before, including spending more money to boost manufacturing and improve infrastructure. Getting that new spending through Congress appears unlikely, given that it would require support from Republicans who blocked similar measures during Obama's first term.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a rising Republican star, was to deliver his party's response. In excerpts of his remarks, Rubio also appealed to the middle class, but sought to draw a distinction with the president by citing "our free enterprise economy" as the source of prosperity, not the government.

The president was expected to be uncompromising in his calls for lawmakers to offset across-the-board spending cuts that are scheduled to begin March 1 with a mix of tax increases as well as targeted budget cuts.

The president hasn't detailed where he wants lawmakers to take action, though he and his aides often mention as examples of unnecessary tax breaks a benefit for owners of private jets and tax subsidies for oil and gas companies. Such measures are modest, however. Ending the corporate plane and oil and gas breaks would generate about $43 billion in revenue over 10 years.

That appeal for new revenue is getting stiff-armed by Republicans, who reluctantly agreed at the start of the year to increase tax rates on the wealthiest Americans in exchange for extending Bush-era tax rates for the rest of taxpayers.

"He's gotten all the revenue he's going to get," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "Been there, done that."

Still, buoyed by his re-election, the president and his top aides are confident that Americans back their vision for the economy. Immediately following his speech, Obama was to hold a conference call with supporters to urge them to pressure lawmakers to back his agenda. He'll also seek to rally public support with trips this week to North Carolina, Georgia and Illinois.

Though Obama was devoting less time to foreign policy in this year's speech, he was to announce that 34,000 U.S. troops — about half the size of the American force — would leave Afghanistan within a year. The drawdown announcement has been highly anticipated and puts the nation on pace to formally finish the protracted war by the end of 2014.

The Myth of Government Job Creation (Excerpt)

February 19, 1984

Thomas J. DiLorenzo - It is inherently impossible for government to create jobs; only economic growth in the private sector of the economy can create employment opportunities. Government taxing and spending programs only redistribute existing jobs: taxation reduces the economic vitality of the private economy, destroying jobs there, even though jobs may be "created" elsewhere by government spending on jobs programs.

Moreover, the question of whether government should "provide employment for all employable United States citizens living in poverty" revolves around another question, whether it is legitimate for government to benefit one group of citizens at the expense of another. If one believes that government owes its citizens justice and equality of treatment, then it is clear that government has no role in trying to "create jobs" through government jobs programs.

But jobs programs are politically appealing. When people are put to work through such programs the jobs are highly visible: workers know their temporary jobs have been doled out by certain politicians for whom they will therefore be more likely to vote.

By contrast, the private sector jobs destroyed through taxation (to finance the jobs programs) are much less visible: the unemployed are not likely to realize that it is the higher level of taxation that has placed them on the unemployment rolls.

Thus, referring to government jobs programs as a means of "creating jobs" is misleading at best, and dishonest and deceitful at worst. This is not to minimize the problem of poverty, but to suggest that government jobs programs are not the solution and in fact very often make things even worse.

The present paper will discuss the economic logic of why governments cannot create jobs and will offer evidence to support this analysis.

Can Government Create Jobs ?
 
Despite the rhetoric of "government job creation," economic logic denies the possibility that jobs can, on net, be created by government. The economist's notion of "opportunity cost" is the key to understanding this phenomenon.

Every action has an opportunity cost, the subjective value of the most highly valued alternative course of action foregone. For example, the opportunity cost of reading this paper is the subjective value one places on whatever alternative activity one might otherwise engage in.

With respect to government jobs programs, what is important is that they are usually financed by taxation or borrowing by the federal government. In either case, resources are withdrawn from alternative, private sector uses. Higher taxes mean consumers have less to spend in the private sector, and reduced consumer demand leads to less production and employment. 

If the government borrows money to finance a jobs program, alternative uses of credit by private individuals and business firms are precluded. This, too, causes economic stagnation and higher unemployment in the private sector. The "cost" of government jobs programs, regardless of how they are financed, is therefore best viewed as the reduction of private sector production and the employment that production creates.

Those who believe that government jobs programs can create jobs fail to realize or acknowledge that they also destroy jobs elsewhere in the economy. Government jobs programs alter the composition of jobs in the economy--more government employment, less private employment--but do not increase the number of jobs. Some may prefer a larger government sector relative to the private sector--and this is what government jobs programs give us--but it is misleading to pursue this objective under the guise of creating jobs.

Jobs programs are politically appealing, despite their inherent inability to create jobs, because the jobs that are fabricated are highly visible: the recipients of such jobs know where they came from and who to thank for them at election time. People employed building bridges or highways know that they are employed because of a particular jobs bill. Consequently, they are more likely to support the politicians responsible for the bill at election time. By contrast, those thrown out of work because private economic activity has been crowded out by taxing or borrowing to finance jobs programs are not aware of precisely why they became unemployed. The costs of jobs programs, in other words, are almost invisible to the average citizen. If one believes that the existence of unemployment is unjust, then the creation of unemployment in the private sector, under the guise of creating government jobs, would seem especially unjust and deceitful.