During an interview that was live-streamed on the app Periscope, Bush made the comments to New Hampshire’s The Union Leader answering a question about his plans for tax reform.The reaction I've seen to this statement is ridiculous. A sample, from my social media feed:
“My aspiration for the country and I believe we can achieve it, is 4 percent growth as far as the eye can see. Which means we have to be a lot more productive, workforce participation has to rise from its all-time modern lows. It means that people need to work longer hours” and, through their productivity, gain more income for their families. That's the only way we're going to get out of this rut that we're in.”
The obscenely wealthy have a robust history of believing that everybody who isn’t obscenely wealthy is not so simply by virtue of being shiftless. If they weren’t already dead inside, I guess that would make it easier for them to sleep at night and look themselves in the mirror.
What makes someone "obscenely wealthy" is a discussion for another day. So, did you sense that ol' Jeb is saying people are shiftless? I didn't. Bush is talking about the workforce participation rate, which is at a lower point than it has been in generations. A lot of people aren't working full time hours at present. For some, it's a conscious decision. For some others, it's because full time work isn't readily available. For some people, the job search has been so fruitless that they've given up.
In my job, I manage 7 people. Five of the seven are full time employees; the other two are contractors. One of the two contractors works 3 days a week; the other works the full week. I have enough work to hire these people and probably one more, but the cost of adding a new employee is so high that it's simply easier to have them work as contractors. We pay our contractors very well, but we don't have to take on any of the other associated costs of employing someone, especially benefits.
I'm not particularly crazy about the arrangement, but we make it work. Employers everywhere do similar things. Would my 3 day-a week contractor have a better life if she worked all five days? Maybe, but not necessarily. Her current schedule allows her time for her family, which is important to her. Mrs. D works part-time as well; she could increase her hours by taking another job, but at this point in our lives it doesn't make sense for her to do so.
I do think a lot of people would like more hours. I know a lot of full time workers would like to work less hours than they currently do. Getting there is difficult and will require a lot of people to change how they operate. Making it easier for people who are unemployed, or underemployed, to find full time work is the challenge. How do you do it? The election hinges on how we answer that question.
3 comments:
I think the big thing you've got to do is take a look at incentives--you don't browbeat someone to work, but rather make it worth their while. Big thing that would be easy would be to rework welfare so it functions as an "on ramp" instead of a parking lot--Social Security disability payments often are a "parking lot", too. I've got multiple paraplegic friends who are capable of doing good work....but if they do, they lose their safety net, which is absurd. Their spines are severed, ain't growing back until a miracle occurs.
I don't disagree with any of that, Bubba. I'm most interested in the barriers to hiring potential employers face, especially startups. It's horribly expensive to hire someone these days and the government continues to pile on regulations that make it even more difficult. And I don't work for a small company, either.
Another suggestion; equal tax treatment of employer paid and self paid health care. Either it's all deductible (including FICA), or none of it is. You could painlessly eliminate a great deal of the Health Insurance Deform Act if you did that simple thing.
Post a Comment