‘It’s the economy stupid’
Editor, The Times:
As much as I was brought to tears on occasion — and I did vote for him — I feel President Barack Obama and members of the Senate and House don’t quite understand how justly upset the American people are [“Obama: Jobs, economy must be ‘our No. 1 focus,’.” page one, Jan. 28]. To hear his speech [Wednesday] night was to hear the elder Bush again: “It’s the economy stupid.” The administration didn’t get it before last night, why should we believe they get it now?
Obama and our elected officials don’t need to worry about getting laid off from their jobs and most of them are rich enough that they don’t even need jobs. They have some of the best health insurance in the world and the American people pay for it. Why shouldn’t the people get the same coverage?
They bailed out the banks with American tax money — the banks that got us in this whole mess because of their greed. Why didn’t the government give all that money to the American people as a stimulus for the economy? I’d like to hear the senators and representatives offer to take a pay cut and show solidarity with the Americans who have lost so much — but that will never happen.
I watched the Republicans sit on one side of the chamber and the Democrats on the other while Obama talked about ending partisan politics. But the one thing I didn’t hear Obama say is that Americans need more choices than the two-party system we have now. That is the only way that partisan politics will end in America and the only way that Americans will have a chance at a true democracy and a true freedom of choice.
— Mike Hickey Jr., Seattle
Why weren’t jobs No. 1 priority last year?
The president said in his State of the Union address that jobs is his No. 1 priority in 2010; Why wasn’t it No. 1 in 2009?
He said 14,000 people lost their health care today, but what he didn’t say is that jobs are still being lost. The unemployment shot past the 8 percent point last year, but he assured us that would be the limit if his stimulus package passed. It was passed, but we are now have over 10 percent unemployed!
Why did it take an election in Massachusetts to get the administration’s attention to really make jobs the No. 1 priority? I hope we see results.
— Larry Brickman, Bellevue
Jobs Act’s economics need evaluating
State Rep. Hans Dunshee displays a lack of basic economic knowledge in his Tuesday op-ed [“A call for the Jobs Act is a vote for jobs,” Opinion, Jan. 26].
No one is calling for a reduction of minimum wage, and even if they were they would not be arguing for taking money from average workers, as Dunshee alleged. Wages are paid based on productivity. If a worker’s productivity is below minimum wage, they don’t have a job.
If minimum wage were lowered, those whose productivity was worth $8.55 an hour would still be getting $8.55 an hour, but less-productive workers would now be able to work. Any employer who tried lowering the wages of more-productive workers to the new minimum wage would risk losing them to a competing firm that would pay more for their services.
Productivity is also behind China’s lower wages. U.S. minimum-wage workers are paid nearly 22 times more than China’s minimum-wage workers because they are nearly 22 times more productive. For example, U.S. factory workers have better technology and training at their disposal than Chinese factory workers have. We don’t need to lower our wages to 38 cents an hour in order to compete with China.
While the Jobs Act seems reasonable, in light of Dunshee’s lack of economic expertise, I suggest The Seattle Times find an economist’s evaluation of the Jobs Act. Adequate information, especially concerning how the act will be funded, is necessary before any major decisions about the Jobs Act are made.
— Sylvie Troxel, Seattle
Job creation comes from entrepreneurs
Neither President Obama nor state Rep. Hans Dunshee get it when it comes to how to create jobs. The president proposes tax credits for individuals and curbing student-loan payments. Dunshee proposes a state bond measure of $850 million to repair schools and public buildings and then schools will somehow find extra money to fund energy-efficient work resulting in $2.5 billion worth of projects. Talk about voodoo economics!
The federal and state governments need to realize that job creation comes from the entrepreneurs in the private sector. They need to make sure that our business climate is competitive in the world economy and encourages entrepreneurs to make investments and take the risks necessary, which will result in the creation of jobs. And this doesn’t mean cutting regulations that lower health and safety protection for workers and the environment.
— Bob Dorse, Seattle