Please forgive my potential ignorance, as I'm not a business owner and thus don't have all the familiarity with all of the rules/ regulations and other issues that affect businesses day-in and day-out. That being the case, I'd like to get some discussion (and perhaps some education) on what business owners think the federal government could really do to spur on the job market.
It seems to me that perhaps tax policy could be adjusted to move some tax burdens off the backs of businesses and onto the employees that work for them, but again perhaps I'm just woefully ill-informed in these matters. What I'm asking about and wanting to see is that businesses need to be encouraged to hire employees and put them to work.
Providing tax breaks for educating employees and/or providing tax breaks to individuals so they can pursue technical educations and/or higher education would seem to help, but then where does all of the money that has to make up for those tax breaks come from? Do we need to raise taxes on individuals while lowering the taxes on businesses and while offering individuals breaks if they pursue the goals of helping to advance our work force? If so, then obviously a lot of tax payers are going to be screaming, depsite the fact that it may benefit them (and society as a whole) in the long run as once we put more people to work and expand the tax base we should -- in theory -- be able to cut taxes for everyone.
This all reminds me a bit of some co-workers I had in the past that couldn't past the "me" to see the "we" when it came to business decisions that would help our employer in the long run. In that instance, much as we've seen with the tightening economy of the last few years, we've had people that couldn't or woudn't bear the brunt of temporary lay-offs, work furlows and the like and instead would rather see co-workers jettisoned if necessary. Those employees always seemed to feel that their employer was being incredibly greedy and they -- the employees -- should not have to change anything or do anything at all. No need to take paycuts, no need to work additional hours despite a fairly generous work schedule, etc. Those greedy business people, they are the ones that need to give more, more, more.
I could continue the rant a little with some comments about the US Postal Service. I have some work history there, and continue to feel for them as an organization. They have serious problems with their budget and yet can't seem to get things under control because their labor pool, like teachers unions, is somewhat uncooperative and unwilling to give back, and every time the Postal Rate Commission grants a rate hike for stamps, the unions start licking their chops at the idea of getting even more money for their members all while knowing that the postal service is bleeding cash all the time.
Going back even further, I remember the Eastern Airlines situation of years and years ago. Eastern's management were sons of .... (no, not Katy Elder) and were greedy bastages, but they warned their union members that if they walked off the job the airlines was going to go bankrupt and there would be no jobs for anyone. The union "called their bluff" only to find out it wasn't a bluff at all. The airline was already broke so they did declare bankruptcy and that was the end of that. Pensions were gone. Benefits gone. Jobs gone. Rather than give back some additional concessions to keep most of their jobs the union leaders refused to give in at all. Too bad for their membership.
Anyway, enough of the ranting. The question remains -- what can government do to encourage businesses to hire employees and further, how can they pay for whatever they do?
