The federal government cannot create jobs. The federal government does not produce anything, excluding confusion. They are, in effect, the board of directors of the United States. Like a board of directors, their job is to set a direction and oversee production.
If we think of Congress as a board of directors then their job is to create the environment for growth. If the government wants to stimulate the jobs market they must decide upon a course of action that will encourage the various divisions within the company to thrive. The first thing that any good board does is decide on what product will be produced that has the best chance of success. Next they decide how much funding it will take to create a successful product. Finally, they approve the budget for the year and allow the various divisions to spend the funds that they approved. If the product is successful, new jobs are created, if not the product is placed on the virtual scrap heap.
The federal government's only influence in job creation is tax policy. Tax policy drives any corporate production in the economy. As fund become available, jobs are created. As funds shrink, jobs are eliminated. The reason is simple, there is only so much money to be used and as the economy shrinks hard decisions have to be made to ensure corporate success. You can look at this explanation and say America isn't a corporation, but it really is and always has been.
So, we have this big pile of money in the middle of the table. It has to be allocated to the product that will best serve the interests of the corporation, the United States. Many in Congress are arguing that those funds are best spent on the general good and welfare of the citizenry, a worthy sentiment, but the pile on the table is getting smaller and smaller because the corporations product offerings are being eliminated; in effect the company is being restructured. In any scenario a decision point has to be reached, do we get smaller and eliminate positions within the company or do we expand, invest our corporate budget in new products or expansion of a successful existing product line?
The federal government is a parasite on American Society, it has a symbiotic relationship with the host at times, but it is still an organism that only takes resourses. It does, in theory, have health benefits but like any parasite it eventually becomes too intrusive to ignore. We have reached the point where the federal government has become too big and intrusive. It is devouring society in an effort to sustain itself at the expense of the host. It cannot help itself, that is its nature. Scott Brown's election this week is a reaction to the fact that the symbiosis that had once existed is no longer in balance. The host is beginning to feel the effects of the parasite and wants to reverse the damage. The parasite does not want to be slowed and is fighting for survival.
All of that goblity gookis just to explain why HCR is dead. The host, in this case the United States, is feeling the effects of the parasite, the Federal Government. We have reached the point where a decision has to be made, do we care for the corporation's divisions and grow them, or do we shrink the pile of money in the middle of the table and shrink the divisions?
Obama's preference is obvious, he wants to transfer the funds in the middle of the table into the control of the board of directors and let them micromanage the corporation's assets. He doesn't trust the division managers to grow their division, he doesn't trust the employees to do their job. He wants central management, with all major decisions being made by the board of directors. The problem with central management is they are isolated from the product. They do not know what the market place will buy or reject. They have a vision of what they think will sell, and they do not look outward at the business enviornment's needs.
My children, they are the byproduct of the corporation's decisions. If the correct decisions are made, that byproduct is fully engaged and productive. If the incorrect decisions are made, that byproduct sits in a warehouse waiting to be leased. I can think of no way for the board of directors to successfully grow the corporation without investing more money in the business. Since the board of directors are the parasites in this example, their influence on the health of the host must be either reduced or eliminated. The energy it is taking to fight of the infection is taking a toll on the overall health of the host.
What the hell am I saying? Look, if the tax rate goes up, and employment goes down, individual and corporate contribution have to go up. If HCR were passed the tax rate would increase, it would not create enough jobs to offset that increase, so the individual and corporate contribution would increase. The corporation, whose only job is to turn a profit, will do what is necessary by increasing prices and cutting jobs, further requireing the tax rate to increase. Repeat the last sentence.
In Utopia, corporations would not care about reduced profits, in reality, it is all they care about.
