Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Job creation - what is your mental model of how it works?

Posted by   + Show Post

In your mind, is the number of jobs created per month something that can be changed instantaneously, like the acceleration of a car, or is it something that changes gradually, like the velocity of a car?


by on Sep. 22, 2012 at 3:39 AM
Replies (11-20):
Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Neither and both.  A job is merely a long-term form of or facilitation of trade. The beginning point of job creation is productivity, productivity which is marketable enough to be sustainable.  Of course there are an infinite number of variables affecting a market in general, and each established market has existing variables and untapped potential.

"Job creation" is really about individual productivity that at some point evolves into trade.  So the strongest variable is individual initiative.  All other variables follow in weight, either by encouraging or discouraging--but not creating--the process.    

 

 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

1bluediamond
by Bronze Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 2:46 PM
What are those variables that are affecting the market place and untapped potential and what role does the president play in affecting those variables?

Quoting Meadowchik:

Neither and both.  A job is merely a long-term form of or facilitation of trade. The beginning point of job creation is productivity, productivity which is marketable enough to be sustainable.  Of course there are an infinite number of variables affecting a market in general, and each established market has existing variables and untapped potential.


"Job creation" is really about individual productivity that at some point evolves into trade.  So the strongest variable is individual initiative.  All other variables follow in weight, either by encouraging or discouraging--but not creating--the process.    


 


 

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 3:02 PM

 As I said there is an infinite number of variables that are generally weaker than the first--individual productivity.  As far as ones that the president affects, we have national security, trade agreements as perhaps the most directly related to the president.  Then we have others that are related to an administration, like the head of the Federal Reserve--which can as a double edged sword.  Then we have policy which is often directed by or with the leadership and cooperation of the president along with others.  In some cases the president directly affects policy like Obama did with the EPA, or potentially through federal permits for drilling.  The list goes on and on.  Things as broad as education and taxes.  Everything that affects our individual lives can have an effect.  Even something as immaterial as predictability of an administration can have an effect.

So "job creation" in political terms is really about identifying the existing variables that may be inhibiting and enhancing growth, so we can either change them or protect them.

Quoting 1bluediamond:

What are those variables that are affecting the market place and untapped potential and what role does the president play in affecting those variables?

Quoting Meadowchik:

Neither and both.  A job is merely a long-term form of or facilitation of trade. The beginning point of job creation is productivity, productivity which is marketable enough to be sustainable.  Of course there are an infinite number of variables affecting a market in general, and each established market has existing variables and untapped potential.


"Job creation" is really about individual productivity that at some point evolves into trade.  So the strongest variable is individual initiative.  All other variables follow in weight, either by encouraging or discouraging--but not creating--the process.    


 


 

 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

1bluediamond
by Bronze Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 3:09 PM
So how does the president go about enhancing growth

Quoting Meadowchik:

 As I said there is an infinite number of variables that are generally weaker than the first--individual productivity.  As far as ones that the president affects, we have national security, trade agreements as perhaps the most directly related to the president.  Then we have others that are related to an administration, like the head of the Federal Reserve--which can as a double edged sword.  Then we have policy which is often directed by or with the leadership and cooperation of the president along with others.  In some cases the president directly affects policy like Obama did with the EPA, or potentially through federal permits for drilling.  The list goes on and on.  Things as broad as education and taxes.  Everything that affects our individual lives can have an effect.  Even something as immaterial as predictability of an administration can have an effect.


So "job creation" in political terms is really about identifying the existing variables that may be inhibiting and enhancing growth, so we can either change them or protect them.


Quoting 1bluediamond:

What are those variables that are affecting the market place and untapped potential and what role does the president play in affecting those variables?



Quoting Meadowchik:


Neither and both.  A job is merely a long-term form of or facilitation of trade. The beginning point of job creation is productivity, productivity which is marketable enough to be sustainable.  Of course there are an infinite number of variables affecting a market in general, and each established market has existing variables and untapped potential.



"Job creation" is really about individual productivity that at some point evolves into trade.  So the strongest variable is individual initiative.  All other variables follow in weight, either by encouraging or discouraging--but not creating--the process.    



 



 


 

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
gsprofval
by Gold Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 3:29 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Sisteract:


Quoting mustbeGRACE:

I don't want to have to deal with the jargon from the physics department to answer this question.

I don't want to deal with dragging out the old physics book .

So I guess you'll be getting us up to speed   (  :

I take it you've memorized the book for us this fine morning.

Yay.

 

trans;lated- Clair is too smart and I do not understand what she posts.

Another example of how many Americans can not compete on a global stage-

It's well known that more jobs have been lost with obama in charge than have been created. FYI: massive layoffs are starting this month--Bank of America 16,000, Coal mines 1,200, American Airlines, etc.

Please explain how job growth has grown with obama when he has DOUBLED the number on unemployment.

Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM
1 mom liked this

 

Quoting 1bluediamond:

So how does the president go about enhancing growth

A president's first duty is to actively work to keep America safe as the Commander-in-Chief.  Then as I said there are trade agreements, policy initiatives, a strong overarching message of policy that can enhance market confidence at the micro and macro level.  Everything that the president has the authority to say, to sign, to do, or undo is what the POTUS should examine.  "Is this helping or hurting?" should be asked in regards to the law. 

It's not just a matter of identifying the issues that need changing or undoing, but also addressing them well. 

Read Mitt Romney's plans for job growth.  Every single thing is focused on either changing what is hindering growth, or protecting what is enhancing growth. 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

mustbeGRACE
by Silver Member on Sep. 22, 2012 at 5:20 PM


Quoting gsprofval:


Quoting Sisteract:


Quoting mustbeGRACE:

I don't want to have to deal with the jargon from the physics department to answer this question.

I don't want to deal with dragging out the old physics book .

So I guess you'll be getting us up to speed   (  :

I take it you've memorized the book for us this fine morning.

Yay.


trans;lated- Clair is too smart and I do not understand what she posts.

Another example of how many Americans can not compete on a global stage-

It's well known that more jobs have been lost with obama in charge than have been created. FYI: massive layoffs are starting this month--Bank of America 16,000, Coal mines 1,200, American Airlines, etc.

Please explain how job growth has grown with obama when he has DOUBLED the number on unemployment.

I agree.

We actually own a business.  We sell on a national level, not just locally.

We open the doors everyday because of demand for our products.

We hope everyone has a good job to buy our products.

If we thought Obama was going to do any good with the whole process  we'd vote for him.

Sisteract
by Socialist Hippie on Sep. 22, 2012 at 7:25 PM

There are also constraints that both the executive and legislative branches must deal with in terms of policies made that might affect job growth and creation. 

Wouldn't it be nice to become isolationists, or at least have the unilateral ability (without all the pesky potential consequences) to slap huge trade fines on imported items? Or huge fines on American companies that want to use foreign labor and simultaneously hide behind all the protections that the US provides?

Unfortunately, that is not our reality.

It's a complex global situation that requires many people and markets working together- Of course, all markets want to come out on top. Just like all individuals want to come out on top.

If you have a job and work with large numbers of people, you can only imagine the issues that exist on a global level.

Everyone having a good job (In the US) is pie in the sky thinking- costs would have to rise to support such jobs-no more WM and cheap crap on the cheaper-

The global economy has changed our potential work force.

The global labor market has changed our available jobs.

The global competition is fierce (and better educated in many cases).

America has much work to do.

It will never be 1950 again.

Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Sep. 25, 2012 at 10:39 AM

To the bolded, no, that would not work.  Adjusting to a global economy is what we have to do.  That is how civilizations before ours lasted, by extending trade of products and ideas, not by closing or hindering trade.  Pretty soon, if not already, China will have a middle class as big as the entire US population, for instance.  The rising global middle class presents an enormous potential for demand for smart, innovative products and everything else.

 

 

Quoting Sisteract:

There are also constraints that both the executive and legislative branches must deal with in terms of policies made that might affect job growth and creation. 

Wouldn't it be nice to become isolationists, or at least have the unilateral ability (without all the pesky potential consequences) to slap huge trade fines on imported items? Or huge fines on American companies that want to use foreign labor and simultaneously hide behind all the protections that the US provides?

Unfortunately, that is not our reality.

It's a complex global situation that requires many people and markets working together- Of course, all markets want to come out on top. Just like all individuals want to come out on top.

If you have a job and work with large numbers of people, you can only imagine the issues that exist on a global level.

Everyone having a good job (In the US) is pie in the sky thinking- costs would have to rise to support such jobs-no more WM and cheap crap on the cheaper-

The global economy has changed our potential work force.

The global labor market has changed our available jobs.

The global competition is fierce (and better educated in many cases).

America has much work to do.

It will never be 1950 again.

 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

sammygrl77
by on Sep. 25, 2012 at 11:02 AM
1 mom liked this
Im not very knowledgeable on this subject. But common sense tells me the issue is with corporate greed, not any president directly.

If the CEO's wpuld take their huge bonus checks and put that money into hiring new workers and paying current workers a decent living wage, demand for products would go up. If they took the money spent on lobbying or supporting either candidate and did the same ss above, our economy would recover quickly.

But instead these businesses are more concerned with the short term of lining the pockets of investors and themselves.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN