Talk:Economy

From Pete Ashdown Campaign Collaboration Wiki

Contents 1 Lacking solutions 2 Offshoring 3 Energy Policy 4 Utah Bankruptcies 5 Framing the Economy 6 Improved Metrics (GPI) 7 Direction on Economy

[edit] Lacking solutions

J. Smith A few more suggestions:

Look at the decline in engineering and math majors in universities - this will have a huge impact on innovation - some good statistics would help make this point. Head of Intel, Microsoft, HP have all cited in major speeches/articles that outsourcing is not the issue, the issue is developing the U.S. workforce. This ties to education at a young age - we must develop much greater foresight to solving long term economic issues. I believe there are lot of complex monetary issues that are not entering into layperson conversations because of their complexities (foreign exchange, monetary policy, savings rates, etc) yet in order for our democracy to work we must make these issues accessible to all of our citizens. If they don't know, they can't care, and they can't participate. Then finally something to ponder is we are using economic models of yesteryear to predict the future. These models will not work now, the economy is vastly different.

Personally, I am amazed that community and continuing education programs at our state and commmunity colleges are not used more. There is a lot of great instruction (even skills that can help someone get a higher paying job) offered by these institutions. The infrastructure and programs are there, but they are not advertised well enough. Perhaps there should be some legislation that either funds more extensive promotion or the better use of already allocated funds to these institutions. This would be a great way to use what is already happening to elevate people to higher paying jobs.--Anhhung18901 21:20, 1 December 2005 (MST)

Our reliance on immigrants in our workforce must be considered too - these workers play an important role in our economy.

This page isn't merely lacking solutions, it's lacking good coverage of the issues surrounding our economic problems. The links provided talk about energy solutions that other countries are adopting. That's a great start, but the energy crisis is only one aspect of our economy, and itself is so complex, that it really deserves its own "issue" treatment.

Here are some questions to get the creative juices flowing:

• Where do you stand on welfare?

Although I believe welfare abuse is not epidemic throughout the system, the inherent bureaucracy looks at cash handouts as the easiest solution. Again, I think modeling on successful programs is something that should be looked at. I would be interested in what people are able to find on this.--pashdown 00:39, October 2, 2005 (MDT)

This is an interesting question. I helped with the passage of Utah's welfare reform act that created Workforce Services. I believe that Utah's framework is a great place to start. We do not just give cash assistance to anyone. Cash assistance when given is usually less than minimum wage would pay. I know people on this assistance and Workforce Services requires them to work and will supply aid for daycare and schooling. This is a great way to help people help themselves. It requires those participating to be part of the solution.

There are several other areas of welfare that need to be addressed on both the state and federal level. These include Medicare and Medicaid. Briefly, in these areas we need more resources committed to fraud prevention. In addition it would be very beneficial to have a single caseworker that coordinates all available benefits including employment services and unemployment benefits. This person doesn't need to be an expert just a great coordinator. I'll add more changes as I flush out my ideas. --James Humphreys 22:31, 21 November 2005 (MST)

• How can we improve the unemployment ratio?

Making it easier to hire Americans ahead of overseas workers. The salaried cost is usually the only mitigating factor in whether a company decides to outsource overseas. Fortunately, many companies are learning that customer service is a reason to keep employees domestic. Global trade is an inevitability in our society. The government can do better to make sure it is equitable for American workers.--pashdown 00:39, October 2, 2005 (MDT)

• How can we best deal with economic disparities -- particularly in ghettos, and racially divided areas like the south?

By providing an avenues of hope rather than despair. My favorite book of the summer, Freakonomics talks about how drug dealers are traditionally a better social system of support than the government in ghettos. They provide better benefits and take care of families who lose members to the trade. Our failure to provide people routes out of poverty is due to an "outsider" approach. Empowering and listening to the "insiders" would go a long way towards finding solutions in their own neighborhoods.--pashdown 00:39, October 2, 2005 (MDT)

Dilvie 21:11, 14 September 2005 (MDT)

Unemployment is a very difficult issue, but here is a thought to at least start the discussion. Throughout US history as we have taken industrial developmental lead in the world we have created whole new industries, i.e. railroads empires, steel and computers. While we are no longer the manufacturing leaders in these industries, we were at one time. We were also the developmental leaders of these industries. We still are in computer technology, but not in steel or rail. We could be again.

As solutions to global needs are developed the US should be leading the way in creating these solutions. This would create whole new industries with both intellectual and manufacturing job growth. Our economy must evolve as the world changes. Some examples are energy issues (renewable energy, infrastructure for it and product replacement of existing technology with new technology). This could help with global warming and reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources. Recycling is another industry that could help with serveral global challenges and creates a great deal of high paying and low paying jobs.

There are many more ideas, but this could be a great way to reassert ourselves as the dominant power in technological development and create thousands of new jobs.

--James Humphreys 22:31, 21 November 2005 (MST)

• What is your stance on the minimum wage? I would like to prejudice your answer by pointing out that I just got finished reading "Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America". It's an enlightening read. I think it's shameful that wages in this country aren't enough that a single full-time worker can support a family's day-to-day expenses. The idea of saving for retirement or purchasing health insurance on such wages is inconceivable. We haven't had a minimum wage increase since 1997, while inflation has chewed away a fifth of the spending power of a 1997 dollar(source). Things may be even worse: I believe rents have gone up more quickly than inflation overall.

I am all for a minimum wage increase. My entry level at XMission is currently $11.00/hr with benefits. Although some may write this off as a "rich technology business", it isn't so. I prioritize my employee salary levels and have happier employees. However, this doesn't fit all businesses. I think exemptions to minimum wage would be appropriate for businesses just getting off the ground. Instead of very profitable national-corporations taking advantage of the minimum wage and "part-time" benefit exemptions, I'd rather see them taking care of their employees responsibly. Increasing the minimum wage would help address this inequity considerably.--pashdown 15:41, October 7, 2005 (MDT)

• Subquestion: should the minimum wage be automatically indexed to inflation?--Bryce 06:13, 7 October 2005 (MDT)

Yes, but only after it is increased for the past decade's lack of attention.--pashdown 15:41, October 7, 2005 (MDT)

Another important economic issue is affordable housing. Down in Washington County many jobs (like school teachers and manufacturing plant workers) have many applicants who want to work here, but they cannot since their wages will not enable them to buy a house in the area. They must live in the same place that Californian ex-pats come to when they sell their houses in California for several times what they initially bought them for. Also, there are many people who move to the area to retire. Both groups can afford to live in the area without working or earning as much. The fact that the US Census Bureau named St. George the second fastest growing metropolitan area in the country in 2005 does not help with the cost of housing either. The inability of many to afford housing is of great concern to the economic development committee of Washington County. What can be done to alleviate this problem? --Anhhung18901 21:31, 1 December 2005 (MST)

As a union member I would like to see you make workers rights part of your campaign. I think that a minimum wage increase is far overdo. The federal minimum wage has less buying power today than it ever has.
I think something also needs to be done with pensions. Although 401K's are a great way to save for retirement, in no way do they take the place of pensions. People do not put enough money into their 401k's. In general unless you belong to a union you probably don't have a pension. With the status of social security always in doubt, I see a real disaster for people of my generation (late 20's). We are going to have a generation of seniors living in poverty that this country hasn't seen since pre FDR. There needs to be laws put in place to require companies to provide pensions based on number of employees, and companies should not be able to default on the promises of a pension to their employees like what has been going on in the airline industry. --Jshmiller 21:49, 1 December 2005 (MST)

[edit] Offshoring

Pete wrote: "There must be legislation introduced that penalizes corporations for this practice [offshoring] when it is done for the sake of profit taking."

Pete also wrote (elsewhere, quoting Hugh B. Brown): "I am a Democrat because I believe they are kinder to the poor."

Can we, on a moral basis, limit offshoring that would help the poor in other countries while still purporting to care for the "poor"? Do we only care for the poor in our own country who are arguably more wealthy than the middle-class in many other countries? (I have no data to back that up that last assertion; it is just my gut feeling.) I ask these questions in all sincerity! --Bradley Ross 20:34, 30 September 2005 (MDT)

There is no way to help everyone at the same time. By working towards lower poverty and joblessness here at home, we then in turn are able to give the rest of the world a step up. Trade agreements should be levers towards doing so, not an opportunity for cheaper labor. I don't advocate resources going to solving American poverty exclusive to the work done internationally. As stated in my National Security section, effective humanitarian work can go a long way towards world view of America.--pashdown 00:23, October 2, 2005 (MDT)

Pete, would you encourage governments that currently give asylum to companies and help them avoid their taxation dues in the United States to change their policies and laws to help bring some of that money into their own economies? Bermuda would probably appreciate the influx of cash if they implemented an income tax to multi-national corporations that use an office address on their shores for avoiding taxation.

--Dbritsch 17:08, 4 January 2006 (MST) Although the overall theory of globalization which espouses equal rights and opportunity for all people is nobel and a worth while goal, the current trend in globalization is not driven by ethical concerns for world equity but instead by pure greed. Globalization which includes standards for equal protection (environmental/worker) for producers between nations should be encouraged.

What is wrong with the current round of globalization, especially in manufacturing and agriculture, is that we are solely concerned with price. Unfortunately it is irrelevant whether the country we are using to produce our goods is run by a tyrant or whether the workers are paid a fair wage, or are treated with dignity, or are allowed safe working conditions etc.. What we need to focus on is creating a framework which ensures that US workers are judged on an equitable level with workers on the global stage. Price should not be the only concern. How does it help poor workers to be exposed to toxic and harmful chemicals which we would not allow our farm animals to be exposed to here? How does it help workers in poor countries to pay large sums to prop up corrupt and non-representative governments.

As far as technical (H1B and the like) outsourcing. I feel that this is short sighted in the extreme. Although we may see a short term benefit in using these (perceived) lower cost workers we are being short sighted on some very important points. We are training the next generation of competent well paid senior IT workers. Problem is that the people we are training are not US citizens and for the most part have no ambitions for becoming such. The long term consequences of this will be that we are exporting the majority of our IT industry to India(mostly). This is great for India and will likely have some very good side effects on their economy (To my earlier point on general globalization, this may be one of the least damaging forms of globalization from a purely global perspective). The question we should ask our self's is why do we WANT to give up this very lucrative and beneficial (economically, militarily, and socially) industry? Why are we are so heavily investing in India's IT future. It can't be all price, I have personally seen offshore developers being paid 65+ dollars an hour and averaging 35-40 dollars an hour. I know many experienced local developers and administrators willing to work for less than that(including bennefits). It could be follow the leader syndrome. I have certainly seen signs of this and think it was a bigger problem than it currently is. Company X has Indian developers so we have to too. \<Rant\> Corporate Officers should not be allowed to read e-week :-P /<rant/> So if it is not price then it is probably perceived quality. If it is quality than we are failing somewhere in our education. Please do not read anything against Indian (or any other nationality) developers. I would make the same comment if we were exporting our IT expertise wholesale to Scotland. While I have no problem in buying software developed in India(or Scotland) I do have an issue with providing tax incentives or any other incentives for companies to do so. I would also like for us to invest more in making sure that any perceived quality gap in US entry level IT skill-sets is corrected and corrected fast.

If we are no longer a major producer and we no longer provide our own services than what is the basis of our economy??

[edit] Energy Policy

Moved to Talk:Energy

[edit] Utah Bankruptcies

Utah is notorious for its bankruptcy rate. This is especially interesting since the LDS Church harps the importance of provident living. Why do so many Utahns file for bankruptcy? How can they be veered away from resorting to this desperate act?--Anhhung18901 23:27, 5 December 2005 (MST)

Largely this is because of our culture. There are a ton of 21 year old young men who are coming off a two year mission, and the first thing they want to do is get married. Along with marriage comes the desire to acquire the trappings of a successful family, a home, a pickup truck, a boat, and some ATVs. How many of you know 21 year olds who can afford all these things? There is also a tremendous desire for people to "keep up with the Jones'es" in this culture. It all leads to people living well beyond their means.--Jdjonsson 17:05, 6 December 2005 (MST)

A successful family should not have too many financial "trappings" if it is based on living modestly. Many "trappings" (i.e. buying "wants" over "needs") would be self-imposed and single people are equally subject to the same tendencies. I know plenty of single adults (20s-50s) who consume and spend more than a family of several people need to in order to enjoy a great life. While your theory may partially explain some of the problem, there surely is more to this issue. For instance, there are many people in Washington County who cannot afford to buy a house with what they can earn since there is a housing bubble and plenty of Southern Califorians who cash in on their homes and move to Southern Utah with the ability to pay off a house using the equity from their previous house. However, this does not address the "trapping" of having to own a BWM when a Ford will suffice, etc. --Anhhung18901 23:19, 7 December 2005 (MST)

Hatch supports the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005, which is aimed at making things more difficult for consumers like these Utahns who end up going into bankruptcy. With this act, consumers who make more than $166.67 a month are forced to file under Chapter 13 instead of having a choice between Chapter 7 and Chapter 13. This act also increases the amount of paperwork that debtors must go through. But it exempts non-consumers who go bankrupt (e.g. rich corporate people). Small business owners are not safe; it makes chapter 11 reorganizations harder, with more bureaucratic compliance obligations. It makes Chapter 13 bankruptcy more severe by imposing 5-year payment plans from the debtors income instead of the 3-years previously. It makes it easier for corporations to repossess their vehicles, evict them from their homes, and garnish their wages. What a shame it will be for young, naive people who are just trying to demonstrate themselves as good Mormons, to find everything they own taken away and be placed into a sort of 21st century indentured servitude to their creditors.

It looks like Hatch has sold his constituents out to their credit card companies (who spent millions of dollars lobbying in support of it.) It also makes Big Government into "a bill collector for private corporations". BryceHarrington 18:29, 4 January 2006 (MST)

[edit] Framing the Economy

Economics is the study of the distribution of goods and services, and you can break down the ways that a society can organize their distribution system by using socialist, communist, and capitalist lenses. But that's boring academia, and something that really works against us when we go on and on about how the markets are doing this or that based on the price index fluctuations or interest rate adjustments. We have too people in our country right now that are so focused on survival to be able to worry about that. That's why the statement "The purpose of the economy is the accumulation of wealth" has caught the attention of so many people, because everybody wants to be rich. But it fails in the face of a Hurricane or grass fires.

What I've gotten from the efforts of George Lakoff and the other framing experts is that we need to figure out how to say things such that people will look at our statements in contrast to what the Conservative Talking Heads spew day in and day out, and they would rather go with our values. It has to go beyond the real economy in such a way that people want to get there; we need them to want to go in our direction because they feel better about what we stand for.

Maybe value is something we should focus on a little. Getting past that real economy towards something else lends itself to a discussion of the real value that our economic system can offer to people, if it is managed in such a way that the real economy is not something they have to worry about as much. And beyond the real physical needs of our people, and beyond the basic structure of our laws that ensure our freedoms, there needs to be a way for us to reach beyond the real and appreciate our worth in whatever context that we use to judge it. The purpose and primary focus of our government is to ensure that we all have the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The conservatives seem to want people to think that the phrase is life, liberty and the pursuit of estate, or property, or profit. Our question may need to be about the value of that estate, that property or that profit when so many people find so little worthy of that pursuit, or have so much trouble reaching an end goal. Going to work another day just to bring in another dollar doesn't sound good to anyone, especially if a high ratio of those dollars are going to corporate shareholders instead of the workers, or to foreign banks instead of local communities.

Ill fares the land, to hast'ning ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay.
Source: The Deserted Village - Oliver Goldsmith

I know I'm getting poetic here, but I hope you'll see where I am going. Instead of the accumulation of wealth, maybe we should set our sights on an economy that appreciates our worth.

Chadlupkes 13:09, 1 January 2006 (MST)

The country of Bhutan is taking an interesting approach to what Chadlupkes is proposing. Foreign and Cultural Minister Lyonpo Jigme Thinley has talked about the socioeconomic measure of Gross National Happiness (GNH) for years (at least since the late 90s). Using GNH requires countries to focus on the overall hapiness of its citizens, and unlike other measures like GNP, it focuses on an end - not a mean. While defining and measuring GNH presents challenges, it is worth considering.--Anhhung18901 17:35, 1 January 2006 (MST)

[edit] Improved Metrics (GPI)

The reframing advocates are absolutely right. Until people stop seeing economic progress in the terms framed by the very limited and destructive view the GDP provides, it is very hard to suggest alternative strategies for real growth. We can only really judge the world when we measure it, and our current measure is stacked against our values. The government should adopt and begin to track an alternative measure of prosperity. Not until a measure like the Genuine Progress Indicator is an actual government statistic will citizens really take it seriously. Thus a progressive economic policy should begin with the adoption, tracking, and regular reporting of such an economic metric.

[edit] Direction on Economy

I think that the government has less to do with the immediate economy than they do with seeding the long term. The section on "corporate governance" on the main page really belongs on its own page. What I'm trying to talk about with my economic statement is the need to for America to reinvest in education and inspiration of our children because that is where we are lacking today and will be suffering tomorrow. If my statement on doing this is lacking please discuss and let me know what can be done in the short-term by the government to help our economy .--pashdown 11:35, 13 January 2006 (MST)

I'm concerned that our government is not fueling meaningful growth in the long or short term. We are too reliant upon running government deficits and personal debt to spur growth. At some point we all (the government and us as individuals) will run out of creditors who are willing to bank roll our obese appetites. Instead, we need to focus on education of both the young and old to lay a foundation for our country to replenish its own capital. Instead of going into credit card debt, people need to invest and save more. Instead of imposing a huge bureaucratic top-down education system, we need to allow individual teachers to do what they do best, teach in a way that is tailored to a specific student and situation (not just a generalization). Our teachers and education system, need more money as well. As we invest and educate more in quantity and in wisdom we will help turn our economy in a positive direction.--Anhhung18901 22:21, 12 February 2006 (MST)