Where President Obama and his (Keynesian economic theory) advisors seem to have failed utterly (trillions of $ given away "at the top" over a three year period, but failing to "trickle down" to spur the economy/create jobs), is: 1), not foreseeing the obvious - that much of such huge amounts given away to organizations "too big to fail" would be siphoned off by cumbersome, ponderous regulations and sticky-fingered manipulators; and 2), what finally did manage to permeate down to worth-while recipient companies would be kept unspent in corporate coffers by management worried about the Obama administration tax threats and EPA regulations.
Amazingly, despite their international prize awards, world-figure economists such as Krugman of the NYTimes still argue that more trillions of top-down stimuli is needed.
While it's not "rocket science", the obvious approach to create jobs quickly, would be to reverse the spending process - to stimulate "from the bottom up", giving at the "everyman-neighborhood" level - not to large companies.
Instead of "bailing-out" failed giants, if checks of say $2000 were sent to each taxpayer (it's average citizen debt anyway), asking that it be spent $100 a week in local neighborhoods: family dinners, shoes, clothing and toys, fixing the car or roof, etc.
In short order, "Help Wanted" signs would begin to appear: waiters, clerks, plumbers, mechanics, then for factory workers.
Can anyone doubt that this would happen - and at a small fraction of the failed "top down" Obama approach.
To continue the growth of jobs and economy - if the punitive strait-jacket of Obama's ideological EPA regulations were softened to curb only extreme emissions (by a panel of true scientists), the renewal of public confidence in the economy would spread to US industry (the disastrous Obama-EPA regulations have already driven thousands of US factories to relocate in China).
And finally, an Obama cessation of excessive-tax-threats upon US industry (promising greater business-friendliness) would further encourage corporate management to release the stashed funds from the initial stimulus bills - and US industry would truly expand.
Largely unreported in American media has been the effect of the Obama's idealistic EPA "job-killing" regulations.
Estimates are that thousands of plants have been closed and millions of jobs lost already - with two new proposed regulations stoking even more fears.
An analysis by National Economic Research Associates shows that two proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on the utility industry will cost tens of thousands of more jobs - and also drive up electricity prices.
In Virginia, coal-fired plants, under EPA attack for years, have cost millions of jobs, Comments by West Virginians are bitterly despairing, "The Obama-EPA 'tree-huggers' sure know how to kill jobs.
" An economic study by the National Association of Manufacturers of newly proposed regulations by EPA's Transport Rule and MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) warns that the requirements for power plants will result in additional job losses.
The study estimates that the proposed changes "would lead to nationwide employment losses totaling 1.
44 million job-years by 2020, and would increase American electricity bills by an average of 11.
5 percent.
" Under Obama's idologue philosophy, EPA's job-killing effects have been major, however, if more broadly reported, political pressure for improvements would be significant.
Finally, for sustaining a renewal of economic growth, the US should modify the tax code that has enabled US corporations such as GE to earn billions of dollars in profit, yet pay zero US taxes - through tax "loop-holes", by shifting US earnings to divisions overseas.
Since President Obama constantly lectures the nation that everyone should bear their "fair share" of the US tax burden, it is extremely note-worthy that the president could receive direct input about such corporation loopholes from his close friend and most honored financial advisor, Mr.
Immelt, Chief Executive Officer of General Electric Corporation.
Amazingly, despite their international prize awards, world-figure economists such as Krugman of the NYTimes still argue that more trillions of top-down stimuli is needed.
While it's not "rocket science", the obvious approach to create jobs quickly, would be to reverse the spending process - to stimulate "from the bottom up", giving at the "everyman-neighborhood" level - not to large companies.
Instead of "bailing-out" failed giants, if checks of say $2000 were sent to each taxpayer (it's average citizen debt anyway), asking that it be spent $100 a week in local neighborhoods: family dinners, shoes, clothing and toys, fixing the car or roof, etc.
In short order, "Help Wanted" signs would begin to appear: waiters, clerks, plumbers, mechanics, then for factory workers.
Can anyone doubt that this would happen - and at a small fraction of the failed "top down" Obama approach.
To continue the growth of jobs and economy - if the punitive strait-jacket of Obama's ideological EPA regulations were softened to curb only extreme emissions (by a panel of true scientists), the renewal of public confidence in the economy would spread to US industry (the disastrous Obama-EPA regulations have already driven thousands of US factories to relocate in China).
And finally, an Obama cessation of excessive-tax-threats upon US industry (promising greater business-friendliness) would further encourage corporate management to release the stashed funds from the initial stimulus bills - and US industry would truly expand.
Largely unreported in American media has been the effect of the Obama's idealistic EPA "job-killing" regulations.
Estimates are that thousands of plants have been closed and millions of jobs lost already - with two new proposed regulations stoking even more fears.
An analysis by National Economic Research Associates shows that two proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on the utility industry will cost tens of thousands of more jobs - and also drive up electricity prices.
In Virginia, coal-fired plants, under EPA attack for years, have cost millions of jobs, Comments by West Virginians are bitterly despairing, "The Obama-EPA 'tree-huggers' sure know how to kill jobs.
" An economic study by the National Association of Manufacturers of newly proposed regulations by EPA's Transport Rule and MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) warns that the requirements for power plants will result in additional job losses.
The study estimates that the proposed changes "would lead to nationwide employment losses totaling 1.
44 million job-years by 2020, and would increase American electricity bills by an average of 11.
5 percent.
" Under Obama's idologue philosophy, EPA's job-killing effects have been major, however, if more broadly reported, political pressure for improvements would be significant.
Finally, for sustaining a renewal of economic growth, the US should modify the tax code that has enabled US corporations such as GE to earn billions of dollars in profit, yet pay zero US taxes - through tax "loop-holes", by shifting US earnings to divisions overseas.
Since President Obama constantly lectures the nation that everyone should bear their "fair share" of the US tax burden, it is extremely note-worthy that the president could receive direct input about such corporation loopholes from his close friend and most honored financial advisor, Mr.
Immelt, Chief Executive Officer of General Electric Corporation.
SHARE
