What we have in the brief comment below ("Sustainable economics") is an opinion from one of those "green sites." They thrive on fear and the absurd; note the highlighted comments for "fear and the absurd." But, what is most ridiculous is the talk by these people with regard to a sustainable [green] economy, as if a green economy exist AND is sustainable on its own. It is a present time fact that neither of these considerations is a reality. First, a "green economy" must, of necessity, begin at home, within the boundaries of our country. This, at a time when we as a nation are desperate for the reestablishment of a profitable and immediate export economy. Secondly and tied closely to the first consideration, is the little known projected "fact" that the Administrations plans for a green economy will give us between 1.5 and 2 million jobs by 2020. ** That's 150,000 jobs a year. The fact is there is no green economic base. A few thousand green jobs does not a green economy make !! Contrast 1.5 million jobs as a projection (also known as a "whim and a prayer") with 4 million jobs lost in 9 months and 7 million lost over the course of 18 months.
** The projected green jobs numbers come from Dan Weiss, Center for American Progress, in an interview with Stuart Varney of FoxNews on 1/1/10.
Sustainable Economics
Ultimately, a sustainable economy is an essential context for every sustainable business initiative. It is what the business both needs and seeks to contribute to: in the long run, its goal is to create wealth by helping to assure a piece of our human future.
One project of the Incubator should be to publish a book about creating the sustainable economy, as viewed from the trenches of creating and growing new ventures .
As matters stand today, the future of the human species is in serious doubt, and is by no means completely assured. We are using up the world’s stores of fossil energy, and in the process releasing its byproducts into the atmosphere. Our presence is everywhere having an impact on the natural environment, and in some opinions has already exceeded the carrying capacity of our very small and fragile planet. If we are to survive, a great deal – almost everything about our current lifestyle – must change. Some of it has already started changing, as in the transition from the incandescent light bulb to the compact fluorescent to the LED. But this is just the beginning. It is the beginning of the end of the era of profligacy.
**********
Conclusions:
In order to keep up with the increased demands for jobs caused by a consistent annual population increase, the national economy needs to create a net 1.8 million jobs per year (link). Combining this embedded need for jobs, a built in factor inherited by all presidents, 4 million jobs were lost during 2009. Obama had hoped for a job loss total of less than a million. We cannot mount a jobs-recovery if the avenue for jobs creation is prescribed and limited to a growth in dedicated-green jobs. But, as noted above, we cannot expect more than 200,000 jobs per year created from green investment when we need -- as in "must have" -- 1.8 million per year, just to stay even with population growth. Obama has no jobs theory except what a child might dream up. "Make-believe" is not policy. On average, recession recovery begins in earnest with jobs increases within 18 months of a recession's beginning. But, as relates to jobs created, this recession is not your Mama's average recession. The sad truth is this: there is no reason to believe that a robust jobs-created recovery is even possible with this Administration. The new "zero" for unemployment, under Obama, may be between 7 and 8 percent. This editor remembers Nixon declaring 7% unemployment as the best anyone could hope. He pronounced 7% "zero" unemployment.
While many speak critically of Bush 43's jobs performance, 3 million jobs in 8 years** according to some reports, keep in mind that GDP increased 56 weeks in a row, a record for the economy, and unemployment stayed at 5% or below except for the last two quarters of his 8 year term. We must admit that 3 million jobs over an 8 period is terrible in comparison to other administrations. BUT the unemployment rolls did not increase during this time. Why? Because G.W. did a much better than average job creating an environment where private enterprise and the entrepreneur could grow and prosper. Obama promised that 90 to 95 percent of all jobs created or saved would be private sector jobs. We would argue that he has not created 20,000 private sector jobs -- actually our total for this category is much closer to "zero" than to any number (remembering that "zero" is not a number).
**Note: typically, entrepreneurally generated jobs are not counted in the official jobs reporting. Clinton is credited with the largest jobs generation in history with 23 million jobs created. What is not reported in this number is the fact that before he left office, 12 to 14 million of those jobs departed the economic landscape in the Dot Com bust. Bush inherited a minor recession because of this fact with 9-11 coming on the heals of this recession.
If Obama continues to discourage the private sector, punish these employers with increased taxes, inflated insurance costs and expensive green regulations, God only knows what will be the final result. Obama's own web site, Recovery.gov, tells us that that he has "created or saved" just 640,000 jobs for the entire year. 325,000 of that number - according to Obama himself - are teaching positions saved; the remainder are union jobs. In other words, virtually nothing was accomplished via the Stimulus bill for the private sector and we have this Administration to thank for that. Actually, for some reason, they seem proud of this fact.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment