POLL: Which of the following do you believe would contribute MOST to economic recovery? Pick one.

I just want to address a couple of things quickly. First, to even try to blame Obama for the mess we are in is like trying to blame the new owner of a farm for the old owner letting the cows out of the barn...it's ridiculous. Second, we are nowhere near being in the shape we were 80 years ago. In 1932 the unemployment rate was over 23% and in 1933 it was still over 21%, which is much more than double the 9.2% that we currently have, as of last month. In fact, it took until 1940 for the unemployment rate to dip under the mid to late teens in percentage. This is not to say that we are not in a depression, yes I said depression, not recession, but we can do a whole lot better. I too spent 16 years in financial services so I know a thing or two regarding basic finances...but I think it's important to get the facts straight. The financial debacle that we are currently in is at least 95% the fault of Mr. Bush...from a war that was manufactured and based entirely on lies (WMD's my arse) that have sense become common knowledge, to a total deregulation of the banking industry coupled with turning a blind eye to the inevitable result of handing out mortgages to people that couldn't afford to buy a pair of socks!

The real answer to solving the issue is almost all of the above: ending the war and saving $5,000 !!PER SECOND!!; increase lending to business (NOT big business, but the little guys); tax breaks for the lower and middle income people (because they ARE the ones that spend when they've got it) and INcreasing the tax on the rich! (those poor, poor bastards...boo hoo); the most critical of all for long term growth, get back to a manufacturing base.

Ending the war is only a temporary patch. I believe that, in the long run, "Investment and emphasis on domestic manufacturing industries" is the solution. The U.S. is becoming a second rate country because we don't manufacture anything any more and must import, rather than export goods. If you examine the rise of China, and the downturn in the U.S., you'll see that when we were a large scale manufacturing country nobody could even come close to touching us economically. Since we have stopped manufacturing on a large scale, there are several world players that have not only touched us but have overtaken us in many areas...China and India just to name a couple. China manufactures everything, maybe not all at good quality but when you make nothing you have no choice but to buy from the ones that do, quality or no, hence the rise of China as THE world economic power today. Besides manufacturing, a firm grip on banking regulatory issues is a key factor, hell this country was on the brink of total disaster just a couple of years ago due to a total lax of regulations under the previous administration, not to get political, but it is what it is. The sad thing is that we would have taken a good part of the world economy with us due to total negligence, incompetency and greed...but enough preaching.

As far as I'm concerned, the writing is on the wall for the U.S. and until we start manufacturing on a large scale again we will never sit upon the world economic throne as we once did..and yes, that is past tense.

We need to take steps to boost small business. The large corporations are doing pretty well (according to the 2Q earnings reports we're starting to see trickle in) and giving more money to people who already own a boat and five cars isn't going to do any good.

The money needs to get into the hands of people living paycheck to paycheck - they're the ones who SPEND their money and boost economic activity.

That's why I'm not sure personal income tax breaks will be as useful as we hope because a lot of the people who would really benefit from (and spend) the money are folks who either don't have an income or who already pay pretty minimal taxes.

Grants, low-interest micro-loans and tax breaks for small business intended to encourage domestic hiring would be a good step.

Don't underestimate the benefit of bringing the troops home. The local economy in Hawaii took a big hit when thousands of troops were shipped overseas. That was thousands of young men (and women) not buying gasoline and cheeseburgers and blue jeans in the local shops. Stores around the military bases took suffered and many of them closed because so many of their customers literally vanished to the other side of the planet.

Start bringing those troops home and let them start spending their hard-earned combat pay in our local shops and businesses again.

Assuming Americans will behave as predictably as they have (and assuming you could implement any policies in a vacuum, haha!), clearly any policy that puts more money into the hands of consumers (on a permanent basis) will do the most to lead us to recovery. So, while all 8 of the policies you listed can work (such as Caty's vote for #8), the only one that would have the most immediate impact would be permanent Income tax reduction for individuals, #4 (assuming you're including Payroll tax reductions). The downside, of course, is that this would cause additional revenue shortfalls into Federal and State coffers and add even more pressure to reduce spending, but as I said, you can't do it in a vacuum.

Of the listed items, I'd have to agree with #8 as having the MOST impact.

There are other things that could help, including providing incentives for small businesses to hire people by removing some of the more onerous requirements that they have to endure once they have 15-50 employees. Giving incentives to large businesses is counterproductive, IMO, as they would continue their outsourcing trend for primarily financial benefits, which only provides value to a limited group of people (e.g. not employees, and not the overall economy)

Bringing the troops home would save the government money but unless it is accompanied with a policy to put these people to work, it would create more unemployment at home. Therefore it must be accompanied with a strong jobs policy.
1. That would be spending the money on repairing or rebuilding America's infrastructure, and protecting regions from floods, tornadoes and hurricanes.
2. That would be giving loans to small and middle-sized business, provided that they spend a reasonable percentage on jobs.
3. That would be increasing the minimum wage, and giving more money to welfare, because the poor spend all their money and cause it to flow (the multiplier effect) unlike those who can afford to hoard it.
4. That would include removing the debt ceiling law, which only puts a limit on money congress has already agreed to spend and which creates uncertainty, which in turn stops business from spending money on growth and jobs.

Tax reductions and incentives only work when people and businesses are making profits and have confidence that this will continue or grow. That is not the case today. Government spending should be better targeted and the cost of compliance should be markedly reduced by revising the tax code and increasing the use of standards and technology (standard business reporting) to enable business and government to save significantly to do the job better, faster and cheaper.

#7 restore manufacturing to the United States. Mark and Nick are right, that the offshoring of capacity to "make things" is at the root of all those issues and that single correction would create all the other benefits listed. Today the engines of production are all in Asia and Americans are essentially limited to service occupations. Manufacturing demands infrastructure and creates jobs in all areas which generate economic wealth, tax income, prosperity, profits for investment, etc.

oh, my
teachers are a gift we just sh*t all over. It is the great American disgrace, frankly.
As to jobs: if we don't do something quickly to re-ignite our domestic job market we can stop pretending that we are still a first-tier "power".
I have heard others talk about establishing programs to make work, similar to the ones FDR used to resurrect our moribund economy in the 30's and 40's.
We certainly are in worse shape today than we were 80 years ago.We have been too proud or protected or distracted to see the truth as it really is.
How can we have expected any other outcome than this massive unemployment that has excluded many older workers from ever again being back into fully engaged, traditional, corporate working careers - hell, we shipped all those jobs to India so the few could ...?
I remember feeling slight queasiness as I listened to clients predict the plight of the older workers. For example, as recently as 15 years from my vantage as a consultant to agribusiness, I heard rumors of an active movement within large corporations to '86" anyone over age 40 who wasn't going to achieve a certain level with that corporation.
So the consequence after 40 years of industry consolidation, shipping jobs off-shore, scrimping on taxes so that the infrastructure of the United States is far behind the leaders of the world:
one we know all too well, either personally or from our friends, neighbors, and former colleagues:
today many well-educated, older workers workers especially those above 55, who now know they will have to work another 15 or 20 years, (both men and women are caught in that predicament), are far less than fully engaged in meaningful work, let alone work with which they can meet their economic responsibilities.
Why is this nation so stuck in its partisan paralysis that it cannot begin to bring to bear its might and power to improve the welfare of its own citizens? What is wrong with the US today? Why can we not establish a make-work initiative designed to rebuild our infrastructure, bring new technology to fruition, rebuild education and critical thinking, and bring value in multiple ways? if not, why not?
Would republicans or tea party oppose?
sorry
short answer: we need to have good jobs in this country for our citizens again. Stop giving jobs to foreign nationals who work for less? or are on non-work visa?
no, if we do that we become protectionist?
I admit. I am puzzled by what this nation has become.
best
ngp

The way to kick the recovery into high gear and make it sustainable is to figure out how to stimulate jobs. Here's a crazy idea. Offer a tax incentive to all businesses, where they get a tax break for net new hiring. If a business increases its workforce by 1%, they get a 2% reduction in their corporate tax rate. If they hire 5% more workers, they get a 10% reduction, and so on. Sounds crazy, right? Desperate times...

Businesses are sitting on cash, hoarding. Banks are refusing to lend, hoarding. People aren't spending, they are hoarding.
I definitely like redirecting the trillions of dollars we spend on protecting the world back to our shores.
develop our Infrastructure, stimulate investment and development in education and research
and yes, the idea about stimulus for hiring: !
thus we have more people working, with available income with which to contribute to tax revenue and still with money to consume.

Lower and more consistent fuel costs would have a very positive impact on the economy.

Easing lending to business. The TARP program in 2008, saved the global financial system. Many people don't understand how the program worked and that it was not a handout to banks. However, the government should have attached a string; a percentage of the cash should have been earmarked for business loans. Instead, the banks took the cash and bought US Treasuries, as it is the safest, most liquid investment in the world.
The government should have also relaxed bank reserve requirements, as they were forced to set aside funds, for bad loan reserves, even if the underlying portfolios were solid and performing.
If money had been injected into the economy at that time, the whole tone would have changed. Banks and businesses would have followed the lead, and put money to work, ie. hiring, R&D, lending, etc.
I'd also like to see resumption of the tax credit for the purchase of a home. The length of the program, would depend on the speed of the real estate recovery, and eased gradually until the market can return to normalcy without stimulus.

@don and @ Mark: investment is needed so desperately.
For me the saddest part of the current "political debate" in the US is the fact that with all the screaming heads of media and politics acting as non-stop megaphones of interest, the population is not learning the truth.
The rancor is both divisive, in other words, and it also serves to continue to conceal that which has been hidden from view for so long.
Let's begin to break some of this down into simple issues and to try to tackle the issue of TARP (and I was at jpmorgan chase for 4 years before, during, and after the fiasco):
Don, you are correct when you call banks out for sitting on their hands and the government hand-out cash as well. The banks used the government funds to cover up the mortal sins of banking that each of them had committed. If the President had not allowed the stimulus package to go into effect, the planet (sic!) would have defaulted by now!
Now, while we can look at what happened and blame Bush (or if we have a nonsense filter working we can try to blame Obama), the melt-down - which in truth is much worse than the Great Depression, altho we are too afraid to admit that - was brought about as a result of the reduction of Banking regulation in the hopes of greasing the skids for business.
With the damage done to banking soundness as a result of the repeal or neutering of the Glass Steagall, we have to admit that we turned jpmorgan, BOA, and all the rest into gambling institutions, wherein the customer is not you or me or the businesses with which we are associate. No, the customer, at least per jpmorgan documents, is THE BANKER! (true!).
Combine our banking gambling escapades with our drive for profitability. What emerges as written history of that damage is a book called Cornered. We now have shipped jobs off-shore, or we have consolidated to such extremes, putting hundreds of thousands out of work, while showing profits.
Now at some point, doesn't this road lead us to a point that is counter to what we actually want? or, don't we really want a sustainable future for our children?
sorry for the soapbox, best, ngp

its 100% about JOB CREATION. we, as humans are truly animal spirits driven - for good and bad. If we are "feeling" good or bad about something - this will drive our behaviors. History has proven time and time again; for those whom are unemployed or those who fear possible loss of employment or those who see unemployment around them; these people will hold a general negative sentiment. Negative sentiment leads to lack of desire to spend, etc. etc. and thus a ripple effect in the economy; less spending leads to further job losses.
Message to our leaders: do whatever it takes to generate jobs. Period. All else will fall in place after this.
Saverio Manzo
http://saveriomanzo.com/index.html
http://www.thinkinsure.ca/car-auto-insurance/car-insurance-ontario/insurance-...

Income tax breaks to individuals; when the population has more money to spend, all sectors of the economy benefit.

while I agree Gay, where do our governments come up with the funds for tax breaks? we all know about our massive deficits and debts; tax breaks will only add to this. Is this really the best solution? If tax breaks were a guaranteed route to direct job creation, then I would be very much in favor. Unfortunately, tax breaks do not encourage spending (slightly). We need programs / spending with job creation as a direct result.
saverio manzo
http://www.thinkinsure.ca/car-auto-insurance/car-insurance-toronto/insurance-...
http://financialconcepts.ca/index.html

All of the above would be marginal at best. It seems to me the biggest problem we have is that the tax system is totaly broken. The income tax system as we know it is cumbersome, and requires much policing, requires tax accountants to advise, and is frought with tinkering tax incentives. GE paaid no taxes last year. Nearly 50% of all people paid no income tax last year. The system begs to be manipulated. Withholding tax has been suspended for the last two years. That keeps money out of social security, already which needs additional funding to keep solvent. Small businesses get accilerated depreciation of equipment purchases. (read- spend profits on equipment in stead of taxes.)

Let's play what-if.
What if we were going to define our desired end-state?
would it include consumerism driven capitalism destined to exploit our fragile biosphere?
Or, might we start with a slightly more modest, albeit following in Plator's footsteps, ideal and get suitable, fully engaging work for all?
try being in a person's shoes, over 60, with 4 kids still in grade school.
Then add trying to find work into that life during an economic and societal crisis such as we are living through. Not much space is there?

Banks have gone overboard in reversing the terrible lending and poor-investment practices that got us in this mess in the first place. They've have to loosen their purse-strings.

@ Ben;
your statement about "the large corporations are doing pretty well" stopped me in my tracks.
At what cost?
how many jobless families exist so that corporations can do pretty well - on the books, at least.
I wrestle with he issue of what needs to be done to co-create a sustainable future; and, I don't think that concentrating all the power, votes, and wealth into the control of an every smaller Plutocracy is good for humanity. I remember the first CEO I had as a client. He had roughly 4,000 employees. He taught me that a leader's first responsibility is towards those others who are his, or her, employees and their families.
That ethics has long left the leadership within the United States, and I believe at a terrible price to our workforce, that very human capital upon which we are to rely.
We as a nation seem to have willingly and glibly given away our ability to be a top-tiered world force to fight partisan battles that stop the very governing and operations of our nation. It is all so very confusing and worrisome: n'est-ce pas?!

Hi Nick, I guess I wasn't clear enough. I was trying to say that large corporations are doing pretty well...for themselves. I keep hearing folks talk about how we need to give more subsidies and more tax breaks to the big companies so we can revive the economy but according to the earnings estimates most sectors are already expected to show significant growth. Some sectors are expected to report double-digit earnings growth and yet employment and personal income in America are stagnant.

It seems clear that the tax break on private jets (just to use a popular and extreme example) is not making life better for the average Americans.

We need to find a way to increase jobs, education and income for the folks at the bottom of the economic ladder. Slashing pay (and jobs) for teachers doesn't seem like a very good way to start.

Nick, "as recently as 15 years from my vantage as a consultant to agribusiness, I heard rumors of an active movement within large corporations to '86" anyone over age 40 who wasn't going to achieve a certain level with that corporation" is a tool used by managers who have no clue how to manage their employees who will not move up the corporate ladder. I suspect it is a preemptive strike to remove employees who may know more than their bosses.

All of the above answer are good as for as they go, however not a single answer really addresses the underlying problems of basic capitalism, the engine of American manufacturing, job creation, and sustainability. Coupled with a Government bent on entitlements programs (both personal [welfare, medicaid, medicare, etc.] and corporate [subsidies, tax breaks, tax incentives])and its desire to tax productivity: Income, wages, wealth (capital gains) and R & D we'll continue in the same manner: Albert Eisteiin said, "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results", and that is what all the answers have in common. This is a 'think outside the box' and it calls for radical solutions.

As a business owner, paying an exorbitant amount of taxes, faced with massive regulation (some of it good) I believe one of the best solutions is to institute the Fair Tax Initiative espoused by Neil Boortz, written by John Linder, Representative from Georgia. Eliminate the IRS and its 70,000 pages of tax crap, its 60,000 employees and institute a national sales tax; a useage tax. Tax the rich where they spend, because they don't pay taxes like the rest of us, they have the money to figure out how not to pay. Same thing with Corporations. The wealthy pay taxes but in such a small percentage in relation to their incomes it is criminal. And this is not a conservative, liberal, or independent topic it is an American Topic. For those unfamiliar or think they know its precepts, I suggest you go to www.fairtax.org and read up. Then reply and tell me it is a bogus or that it would not work. If I get replies I'll address those who think it won't work and the negatives they'll state of why it won't. Our economy is not working now and the only solutions I've seen people post are the same old stuff the main stream media and politicians orate from their ivory towers. What do we have to lose?

I do not have any quarrel with the current tax laws because it will always change based on the type of Govenment in power. I believe emphasis should be on investments so that we can create more capital and domestic manufacturing industries which will in turn resort to increase in Gross Domestic Product and National Income.
Consequent upon this, we should end our occupation in Afghanistan and Pakistan ASAP and direct the resources to create easy access of funds to genuine small businesses that can grow to become conglomerates. In addition, more emphasis should be placed on development of Nuclear Energy.

No, the basic tax laws do not change with what government is in power, only the addendums of who gets what breaks and incentives. The Fair Tax Initiative levels the playing for all individuals and companies, because is it based on your consumption, not on who your lobbyist can influence to vote for the industry breaks and loopholes. I suggest to read and study the Fair Tax Initiative for will will accomplish exactly what you speak of on a level playing field. Why do you thiink we outsource our Customer service jobs, our manufacturing jobs, it is because the Tax incentives are extremely high to locate the centers in foreign countries. Eliminate those incentives, influenced through industry lobbyist, and make it more fesible to locate here to do business.

This is what I mean by those not familiar with the fair tax. After reading the two books or even visiting the website and educating yourself, you would not say I'm fine with our present tax laws. Yes, I agree more emphasis should be placed on Nuclear Energy.

I love it when one-note-Johnny, blow-hards sound off without either reading someone's bio or not even bothering to read a previous post. I owned and managed my own investment firm for over 10 years and was ranked in the top 5% of all financial services firms in the country for the companies I represented, so I have no 'entitlement attitude'. The fact that so many fail to grasp is that the financial-political system of this country (or any other for that matter) is one big boys club that makes up it's own rules, Joe Blow be damned. It also protects it's own by handing out huge tax breaks (as well as bail-outs) to cover 'the rich', namely themselves..as is evident by the fact that so much of the 'bail-out' money went directly into the pockets of the very people that put us in this situation, in the form of bonuses. Bonuses for perpetrating the largest fraud in U.S. history! The very idea of defending that kind of 'system' speaks volumes of the person or entity's character. Either that or it is a sign of insurmountable ignorance. Peace out.

Reduction in government spending

@mark: sounds as though you might agree with Thomas Pynchon's depiction of the US as a plutocratic oligarchy. a country in which many have been, and continue to be , deceived by the Tube ; and a country in which you either are among The Elect and the Preterite.
calling it an old boys club is such sugar coarting
best
ngp

First you have to remember that the vast number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are National Guard not full time military. Most have no guarantee that their job will be there when they get back or will be able to keep their job since many suffer from PTSD. So as it may save money it will not boost the economy. Many of their families have been struggling with debt and trying to keep their homes. Since most of their money will be used to get out of debt it will not boost the economy any more than the rest of America being out of work would.
Boosting the ability of small business to grow and hire would help since large corporations have learned to run lean and are not hiring that much even with showing profits.
Tax incentives to large corporations has only boosted the compensation of the senior staff more than it has created jobs or increase the pay of the workers.How does this help the economy? I know the senior staff will increase their investments in other corporations.
Tax incentives to individuals....I think most would use it to pay down debt as they have learned their lesson in over spending. Individuals see that they need to live within their means. This would be a start to help the economy but I am afraid we would not see the results for a few years. And yes I am for this.
Investment in R&D and to produce manufacturing for the country to create more jobs here. We need to invest in solar, wind and wave technologies in order to power this country without a dependency on foreign oil and raping our landscape to get coal to fire polluting power plants. Nuclear energy has its downsides such as deteriorating plants and toxic waste. We need to further R&D in the automotive industry to get more cars that do not use gas but are efficient and go longer distance. We need to keep our auto industry alive as it means jobs for people which helps the economy.
#7 would definitely be a step in the right direction as it would create more jobs and get people back to work.
How about putting the reigns back on the financial institutions especially Wall Street and the Mortgage industry so that they cannot tear down our economy with their schemes to get rich by selling crap as gold.

7. Investment and emphasis on domestic manufacturing industries

as long as we ship our jobs off-shore for tax breaks and keep only the low wage, non-value-adding jobs, what kind of future are we providing for our children and theirs and theirs?
Or, don't we honestly care?

Stanford,

No doubt sales tax on tourism would would be helpful. However, the far bigger bang fron the "fair tax" wpould be the added taxt to all imports. They would all be taxed at the "23%" additional level. Whille that would add revenue, it would make "made in USA' more competetive and add jobs.

PBs

A smattering of all the above would help, but the biggest problem to solve is unemployment. The most recent 9.2% figure does not include individuals who have been out of work so long that they have dropped from view of the survey points, e.g., if they have given up looking for work or joined the ranks of the struggling "self-employed." I have seen many sources who estimate the ranks of the unemployed well above 15%. This not only strains gov't saftety-net resources at every level (gov't outflows), but also lowers taxable revenues (gov't inflows). The high level of people with zero to subsistence level income impacts gov't and the private sector alike.

From where should we look for jobs come? A study released in July 2010 by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, shows that net job growth occurs in the U.S. economy only through new business formation. This study, "The Importance of Startups in Job Creation and Job Destruction," bases its findings on the Business Dynamics Statistics, a U.S. government dataset compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau. The study reveals that, both on average and for all but seven years between 1977 and 2005, existing firms are net job destroyers, losing 1 million jobs net combined per year. By contrast, in their first year, new firms add an average of 3 million jobs.

Should we look to the banks to ease credit standards to stimulate new small business? What banks are undertaking is not "hoarding" cash, as some have suggested, but rather preserving capital in order to maintain regulatory-required ratios (Aside: At this writing, 888 banks remain on the FDIC’s troubled bank list, which continues to grow). Banks are rightfully risk-averse as a matter of survival, nor would it be right for policymakers to create artificial stimuli which would encourage loans to riskier small businesses, much less startups. We don’t need a business chapter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

On the contrary, what we need is a judicious reduction in local, state and federal regulatory disincentives to new business formation. If any of our policymakers are reading, let me say this: not only is it the economy, stupid, but in the real world, when it comes to net job growth, startup companies aren’t everything - they’re the only thing that makes a difference.

Thank you for getting it. That alone is what will bring manufacturing back to the USA. In further dicussion, the implementation of the 'fair tax' can be accomplished fairly easy: the sales tax collection structure is already in place so to structure another line item in the cash register and collect it to an accoount is very doable. As the book says, we could institute it 'cold turkey' on January 1.

Everyone think this is rocket science when it's third grade math. It is easily understood, easy to implement, and the numbers make sense. I challange anyone after they READ the first Fair Tax book, to tell me or anyone it will not work.

As long as the incentives favor foreign outsourcing for big manufacturing companies we continue to struggle. And yes it is the small business that employs the largest part of the work force, however the government has made it so difficult to compete with large manufacturing operations from overseas, the small company is at a disdvantage immediately plus because of overhead, they are on the verge of always losing the business to an overseas competitor.

Thank you for reading and understanding the concept.

I agree completely...and that unemployment figure you mentioned is probably much higher than 15%. Many of the unemployed as you mentioned have gone into Ind. Rep. status just to try their hand at the straight commision 'gig'. Those do not register as unemployed nor employed. They are under the Government radar until tax time and the 1099's go out and even then generally do not register. Again I agree with new business formation. I receive hundreds of e-mails through a former colleague on the unemployment situation in northern California specifically the area know as Silicon Valley (I live in Tulsa, OK). Almost all of the networking e-mails listing potential openings and contacts are start-ups, businesses looking for V-2 funding, or people looking for others to explore a start-up amongst themselves. It is the only way...Google, Facebook, Yahoo, are prime examples of where start-ups can go.

we need meaningful jobs so that we again start using our human capital in constructive ways. We have shipped so many jobs out of the US or consolidated them out of existence, thinking only greedily about bonuses and individual wealth without sincere ethical treatment of employees.
It is tragic how the American worker has been treated: and, so long as we are ruled by partisan paralysis or the even worse alternative, a plutocratic oligarchy - the one seemingly at present pulling all the plaits of warp threads without regard for others, we are doomed as a nation. The US has sent itself plummeting to the second tier of world powers - and, isn't even aware of that possibility let alone the tear-inducing reality that it already has happened for many American workers.

The problem with adding a 23% tax to all imports is that nearly all of those countries would likely retaliate. Which means we might sell more goods to the ~350 million folks in the U.S. but we'd likely sell LESS goods to the 4 billion people in the rest of the world.

And there are some things that really aren't made in the U.S. in great quantities - television sets for example. So American consumers would have higher prices on imported goods and less choice.

I'm not sure I have a better idea but it's a difficult problem to solve and I doubt adding the additional tax is the right route. Foreign countries have cheap real estate, criminally cheap labor, few if any regulations. Throw up a factory on cheap land, hire people for pennies a day to work there and crank out widgets by the shipload for a tiny fraction of what it costs to make them here.

Probably our only chance is to compete on quality, lobby for a liveable wage in other parts of the world, try to reduce the cost of living here generally and do what we reasonably can to keep business costs low here.

One of the tough things about discussing the Fair Tax H.R.25, is unless you have read the book and its provisions you get it piecemeal and statements like the above are made out of ignorance. I am truely not trying to be a jerk, but...1)Currently the US corporation locates a factory in China because the tax struture here is the US is so prohibitive it is cheaper to locate base manufacturing there. 2)The Chinese Government subsidizes the labor wage so that the real cost to Chinese manufacturer's is about 50% of normal EX: If the wage is $12.00 the Chinese Government pays the factory $6.00 for that worker thus reducing the labor cost by half. Watch the public stations that broardcast the progress of the Chinese people. You see Malls, modern grocery stores, cars, department stores, etc...granted much is propaganda, however the factories taking American jobs are just like ours, modernized, assembly-lined, CNC machining, and all the other robotics of modern manufacturing. You can't have modern stores and malls and consumerism without the income. 3) American Corporation pay taxes on goods produces and sold over seas to the US Government and to its host Government. US coporations must charge more to recoop this cost. On the other hand most foreign government do not tax its corporati0ns on earning made over seas, thus putting US companies at a disadvantage. i.e. US corporatins are tax twice.

Please read the book, Page 62 & 63 explain it alot better than I.

That's all well and good and none of it explains how imposing a tariff on imported goods is going to solve any of those problems for U.S. companies or make life better for Americans.

I think that lending to business will help to recover the economy well. Small businesses are a important factor at the base of the world economy.
www.herts-carpetcleaning.com

Tariff is very good. We can use it to protect domestic industries because competing imported goods will become more expensive and unattractive to consumers. the question is whether the tariff is in line with the principles of free trade. Isn't it going to create enemity between us and our trading partners. However, we have to do what we have to do, in order to get out of this hole. And connecting this to the outsourcing of jobs which is synonymous with importation of cheap labour means that outsourcing of jobs can be discouraged by heavily taxing companies that embark on this practice.
Please, note that domestic outsourcing ia greatly favoured against international outsourcing. As we all know, domestic outsourcing is going to produce more jobs locally in the country with the consequent reduction in unemployment rate.

We must have the following in order to have a meaningful recovery:
• An environment that encourages risk taking,
• And access to affordable capital.
Washington is not creating a climate which encourages businesses to step out and take risks. We don’t know tax rates, and the cost of massive new regulations that will increase the cost of doing business. There appears to be capital available at low interest rates, but access is very difficult. Without both access to capital, and a feeling that risk is not excessive, you will not have a meaningful recovery.

I agree 100%. In accordance with your thinking instituting the fair tax initiative would eliminate all uncertainty of corporate taxaton, or any new proposed taxaton of corporations, and create an extremely friendly atmosphere for the return of jobs and manufacturing. Having the highest corporate taxaton in the world puts us at a disadvantage on the world stage. The only way to compete is to ship jobs and manufacturing overseas. The element of risk would disappear because businesses would know exactly what their tax structure was, is, and going to be. Of course, this would mean the dismantling of the IRS, the D.C. lobbyist organizations(there would be little to lobby except for states' Federal money)