What can be done to create jobs? Six leading ideas.

The job market has shown some very welcome signs of improvement lately, but it still has a long way to go before approaching something Americans would call normal. Here’s a look at some of the proposed solutions out there. 

6. Get fiscal policy right, if you can crack it

REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
President Obama talked about the $447 billion American Jobs Act at Manchester High School Central in Manchester, N.H., in November.

Here's one area where Republicans and Democrats sharply differ. Both sides agree that rising national debt poses a serious threat to the economy over time. But many liberals say the US needs more near-term fiscal stimulus, even if that means higher deficits for now.

Christina Romer, Obama's former top economist, is among those who argue that the initial $787 billion package of tax cuts and spending passed in 2009 helped, but wasn't enough to match the magnitude of the jobs problem.

In a December speech, Ms. Romer said Obama's recent proposed follow-on, the $447 billion American Jobs Act, is on the right track but should be larger. But economists are divided over whether stimulus is effective. After a long and deep recession, in particular, it may not be easy for stimulus to generate a snapback to the prior "normal."

So Republicans argue for policies designed to reduce taxes, regulation, and federal spending. They argue this will free up resources and boost private-sector spirits.

A rapid downsizing of government, however, would pull spending out of the economy, perhaps even causing a new recession. Thomas Donahue, president of the US Chamber of Commerce, emphasized the opportunity for gradual spending reforms in a recent speech on how to boost job growth and also called for steps like domestic energy development and innovation policies.

Some economists embrace a hybrid approach on fiscal policy, imposing new discipline but not too fast – and perhaps throwing in some added temporary boosters for the economy.

6 of 6

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.