Should the government be involved in job creation

[kvnchrist]

Should the government be involved in job creation.

 

Should a body so holding to big money be involved in creating jobs in the private sector. Should those so holding to their contributors and their distinct ideology be the one's to place tax money into this area. Government is not liberal or conservative, but our leaders are. Should whoever is in power be granted the right to us tax money to pick and chose which company or industry gets this money and who, if any are bailed out.

 

It seems to me, that if these companies run themselves into the ground, they should be the ones to bite the bullet and If their idea is so great, they shouldn't need the government to invest in them, or to pick which companies win contracts or not.

 

I know the flavor of the month is the solyndra hearing, but this is not the first or the last we will hear of these messes. Halliburton, got their time on the last administrations sugar titty, just as some have sucking on this administrations mammary gland. As for me. Personally, I think their lips have ventured farther south, both in congress and the presidency, looking for a more appropriate appendage, but that's my opinion.

 

Should we be subsidizing the governments appetite to reward those that support those in power?

[SpellAndShield]

Should the government be involved in job creation.

 

Should a body so holding to big money be involved in creating jobs in the private sector. Should those so holding to their contributors and their distinct ideology be the one's to place tax money into this area. Government is not liberal or conservative, but our leaders are. Should whoever is in power be granted the right to us tax money to pick and chose which company or industry gets this money and who, if any are bailed out.

 

It seems to me, that if these companies run themselves into the ground, they should be the ones to bite the bullet and If their idea is so great, they shouldn't need the government to invest in them, or to pick which companies win contracts or not.

 

I know the flavor of the month is the solyndra hearing, but this is not the first or the last we will hear of these messes. Halliburton, got their time on the last administrations sugar titty, just as some have sucking on this administrations mammary gland. As for me. Personally, I think their lips have ventured farther south, looking for a more appropriate appendage, but that's my opinion.

 

Government is best at wasting other people's money so it stands to reason it's not good at creating jobs, other than bureaucratic or military ones. What goes on in the US is basically a form of soft fascism.

[HeyYou]

The government cannot directly create sustainable private sector jobs. (one could argue they don't seem to be able to do it indirectly either...... unless of course, you count jobs in china/india/etc.) They might be able to provide a climate in which job creation is more feasible, but, that's about it. (and they suck at that too..... unless you count china/india/etc.........)

 

The banks should not have been bailed out, they burned their arse, they should sit on the blister, same goes for the auto companies. Now, I will grant that the collective collapse of those in roughly the same time frame would have done horrible things to the economy, but, my question becomes: Would we have noticed a difference? The banks got billions of dollars, which they promptly used to pay millions in 'retention bonuses' to the people that sank them. WTF? Seriously??????? The logic in that escapes me completely. So, not only did the banks get bailed out on those crap loans they wrote, they still foreclosed on the houses that the government had just basically paid off, and then turned around and sold those same houses...... So, get money from the government, get money from the house, all in all, a tidy profit for the banks. Who loses? The people that used to live in those houses, that now have a major hit on their credit score..... In all reality, had the fed just given 30 grand to each registered voter (bailouts divided by number of voters.....) The people would have been able to do something with their mortgages, would have been in better financial positions because of it, and perhaps auto sales wouldn't have dropped like a stone...... but no. Can't help the common man, got bail out the bankers, and the big corporations, you know, the ones that make campaign donations....... and advertising dollars......

[Balagor]

In short: NO.

In DK, part of our railroad system is privat and state owned. It works this way Railroad board sets the budget, Gouvernment gives it to them. Gouvernment has no influence, and can not be held responsible (very conveinient). Manager of the board can be held responsible when they make mistakes (and there are many). He gets fired, with a "golden handshake" of 10 mill.

Their latest "mistake" was this, to get a rail road contract in Sweden, they made a low offer, a kind of rebate. Later, they simply asked for a raise of the budget at the gouvernment, that can no be held responsible. So now Swedish passengers can joy and be happy for the cheaper tickets payed by Danish taxpayers. It costed us 2 billions.

Only hope is that our newly elected gouvernment will clean this mess up, and cut all contracts with the railroad company.

Gouvernments should stick with police, millitary, firedepartments, socialworkers, etc.

[kvnchrist]

The government needs to keep it's ideology to itself. It needs to create a level playing field for all Americans and American companies. This includes hammering the totally unfair prices that some companies, like the Pharmaceutical companies for charging exorbitant prices for their drugs in the U.S. while offering them at a lower price outside the country. I have a cusin that has to pay $19.00 for a 30 pill script for her child. If she didn't have insurance, she wouldn't be able to make it. Fuel prices are also something to look at, but the government needs to understand that they can't subsidize corporations on the public dollar. Corporations need to rise and fall on their own merit. If they are too big to fail, then they are too big. If this is true then their mistakes can effect too many and should be broken up. I guess the government can't see that, which I don't believe. I think they are looking the other way. The energy companies should also be taken a good look at. Them, along with the oil companies have been raping Americans for a very long time. Something is very wrong here!

 

I think there needs to be a heavy hand set down on some of these industries that screw the citizens, but the government needs to stop picking who they want to profit from them being in power. They are there for a reason, and it isn't to reward those who support them

[HeyYou]

Government Subsidized Industries:

 

Video Games........

 

Agriculture.

 

An interesting article.....

[draconix]

They should be involved in the process of getting their hands off the market and off the printing press. Does this count?

[kvnchrist]

Government Subsidized Industries:

 

Video Games........

 

Agriculture.

 

An interesting article.....

 

 

Corporate welfare is an abomination. Companies and business need to be left alone, unless they are digging into the American pocket book. They don't need to be subsidized, because if they are, It's usually, something that they or the government did or didn't do that caused them to need these subsidies. Why should the public pay for the screw ups of others.

[crimsonblade1]

I'm a Libertarian, which means I think the government shouldn't be involved in a great many things it is involved in today.

[marharth]

Job programs might be able to work. Anything involving taxes to help job creation is a bad idea imo.