iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
GET UPDATES FROM Arianna Huffington

If "America Can Do Whatever We Set Our Mind To," How Come Our Leaders Won't Set Their Minds on Jobs?

Posted: 05/10/11 03:59 PM ET

"We do big things," President Obama said during his State of the Union speech in January. And, in fact, we do. Sometimes. Finding and dispatching Osama bin Laden certainly qualifies. "We are once again reminded," the president said after announcing the terrorist's death, "that America can do whatever we set our mind to."

But if that's true, why are our leaders so accepting of a stagnant economy? If they really focused on the havoc it is wreaking on the lives of tens of millions of Americans, they would, in the memorable words of Richard Clarke, be running around with their hair on fire.

But they're not. Instead, they express concern but resign themselves to the fact that, as White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee put it in an interview with HuffPost, the economy has "a long way to go." Meanwhile, we're being asked to accept years of underemployment, low growth and draconian cuts to America's social safety nets as the "new normal." Or, as Bill Clinton put it in a different context, the "tyranny of low expectations."

It's a testament to these low expectations of our leaders that we're supposed to take recent economic figures as some kind of good news. In March, the economy added 216,000 jobs and the unemployment rate fell from 8.9 percent to 8.8 percent. Not bad. But not good, either. And if you take a closer look at the numbers, you'll want to keep that celebratory champagne on ice. Because while adding jobs is obviously better than shedding them, even if we continue to add 200,000 jobs a month, it would take until 2019 to achieve the employment level we had when the recession started. "There are still five unemployed workers per job opening," Heidi Shierholz, economist with the Economic Policy Institute, told HuffPost, "far worse than the worst month of the early-2000s recession."

What's more, much of the downturn in the unemployment rate was actually caused by people giving up and leaving the workforce. As the New York Times noted, participation in the workforce fell to 64.2 percent, the lowest mark in 25 years. If you were to factor those who have stopped looking for work into the official unemployment rate, it would be 9.8 percent. If you were to include those working part-time who would rather be working full-time, it would be 15.7 percent. "Being happy with the falling unemployment rate right now," said Wells Fargo's Jeremy Ryan, "would be like being happy that your team won because the other team's bus broke down on the way to the field."

April's numbers were equally disconcerting: even though the economy added 244,000 jobs, the unemployment rate rose from 8.8 percent to 9 percent. Even worse, the unemployment rate for African-Americans jumped to 16.1 percent. And for those over the age of 55, the average length of time spent looking for a job is now over a year.

Add to that an anemic GDP growth rate of 1.8 percent for January through March, down from 3.1 percent for the last quarter of 2010, and the fact that, according to U.S. Census numbers released last week, the percentage of young adults living with their parents has jumped to a staggering 34 percent, largely because of their limited job possibilities.

Then there is the chilling reality that more than 28 percent of U.S. homes were underwater in the first quarter of the year, and foreclosures are expected to rise 20 percent this year. "We get tired of telling such a grim story," Zillow economist Stan Humphries told Bloomberg News, "but unfortunately this is the story that needs to be told."

Told, but apparently not listened to. At least not in Washington.

It's no wonder then that, according to a recent Gallup poll, over half the country currently believes we're in a recession or a depression. Or that a New York Times/CBS poll shows that 80 percent say the economy is in fairly bad or very bad shape.

How are these not hair on fire numbers?

Yet our leaders, who are supposed to be doing big things, seem instead to have made their peace with "the new normal." Take the Fed: it could be doing a lot more to create jobs, but instead it's guarding against the phantom bogeyman of inflation. "Why has Mr. Bernanke decided to accept widespread unemployment for years on end, even though he believes he has the power to reduce it?" asked David Leonhardt. "After all, does the economy feel as if it's on the verge of overheating?" Hardly.

At the New America Foundation's conference about the Federal Reserve, the Peterson Institute's Joe Gagnon said that the Fed's timidity is responsible for the loss of 1 million jobs. "Apparently," writes Mark Thoma, "the millions and millions of people who are unemployed, some of whom won't be reemployed until years from now if we do nothing to help, are supposed to be patient because people with power over policy are worried about inflation and higher interest rates."

Our elected leaders aren't any better -- less focused on the job crisis than on arguing about how to best divvy up harsh cuts to the social safety net and programs that benefit the middle class. Meanwhile, profits for the Fortune 500 jumped by 81 percent in 2010, to $318 billion. Clearly big things aren't out of reach for everybody.

It's not that we can't do something big about the economy -- it's that our leaders choose not to. Or, as Mark Thoma puts it: "We can't help to stimulate job growth if we don't try, and so far we aren't trying anywhere near hard enough."

President Obama himself connected the economy to his can-do speech about Osama. Immediately after declaring that "America can do whatever we set our mind to," he said, "That is the story of our history, whether it's the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggles for equality for all our citizens."

But, at the moment, that doesn't seem to be the story of our country. We are dangerously close to accepting a bifurcated economy as the new status quo. Yes, there are political realities. Yes, the parties are hugely divided.

But if it's true we can do "whatever we set our mind to," then how about we set our mind to reigniting the American Dream for everybody, and not just those few for whom the recession is an out-of-sight-out-of-mind reality? There is no bigger Big Thing we can do as a country right now.

 
 
 

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff

 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,628
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (37 total)
03:03 PM on 07/08/2011
Not the end of the American dream, but definately the beginning of the end of the American nightmare: the two-party political system of the United States.
Syllogizer
Barely Left of Pobedonostsev
04:31 PM on 07/08/2011
You wish. You must have missed the memo. The Republican party's plot to reduce the Democratic Party to insignificance is working. We have in fact become a one party state and have been since Bush was chosen for us by the Supreme Court.
02:14 AM on 06/18/2011
If the Obama administration would have taken a more balanced approach to bailouts we might have been further along in our recovery. Instead of giving all the new bail-out-money to corporations they should have put more money in the hands of the consumer. After all, if the consumer doesn't have more money to create the demand for products and services then what incentive do companies have to hire? The slow recovery is not do to a failure of the capitalism it is a failure of government policy.
04:33 PM on 06/17/2011
Since I started paying attention, 1980's I guess, it always struck me how every time unemployment went up, so did the Dow and whenever unemployment went down, so did the "Market". The American corporation cares only about investors profits (and they are fairly unique in this approach). Jobs and wages are a cost. Costs are bad. So the market has pitted the investor/executive class against the worker for at least the last thirty years and the hard truth is there was really just a couple short sweet spots in our history where better paying jobs meant happier companies. Corporations will continue to find ways to eliminate american workers from their business model. In fact, the bigger overseas markets become, the less they care about the american consumer as well (who is a direct descendent of the american worker).
Once the Amercian infrastucture is sufficiently degraded due to lack of investment from bankrupt governments, the companies will simply abandon their american presence altogether....see ya suckas.
02:51 AM on 06/18/2011
The average worker has a stake in the performance of the stock market because much of their retirement savings are invested there.

Many manufacturing jobs left the country when Clinton (a Democrat ) signed NAFTA. The more coercive organized labor is and the more unreasonable their demands the more likely the jobs will move to a location with less resistant less costly and more appreciative work force.

Technology has made the world smaller. Corporations compete globally and as such must keep their costs competitve or go out of business. If you want a secure employment with guaranteed annual pay raises and a 401K guaranteed to grow year after year then you'll have t find another planet. Despite what you may think, laying people off is not something corporations get alot of satisfaction from. It is painful for them too. Most of this recession was cause by poor government policy not corporate greed.
10:41 AM on 06/21/2011
Technology matters. Higher productivity mean less labor, for sure. NAFTA hurt poorer companies more than the US, so I'm not sure to what you refer here. Unions or not, asian labor will always win. Even unions went away reduced labor costs 20% asian labor is still and will always be cheaper...10 to 1 ratios for vietnam, 8 to 1 for china, 6 to 1 for india. Blaming government is easy, but the truth is, it is incorrect. When we can start to agree about the challenges, then we will have a chance at a solution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Hendricks
see wikipedia
11:37 AM on 05/28/2011
Why not a solution that bypasses the government stalemate and puts people to work now? Arianna this Huffington Post won't talk about it but National Hiring Day is coming. It's a great idea and it could quickly put hundreds of thousands of people back to work. It is not pro left or right. It is not from any corporation, it's outside the government control, it's totally voluntary, and helps all with little sacrifice from anyone. National Hiring Day #4 is suggested for July, 2011. This is a day that corporations are encouraged to hire new employees. Corporations are called on to put patriotism first and help their country in hard times. Those corporations that cannot hire, are asked to stop firing for that month. The day was suggested by the 18 year old Dallas art and media zine Musea.

Republicans should love this because it's outside the government and voluntary. Democrats should love this because it helps those needing jobs. Independents should love it because it helps all with little sacrifice from any one corporation, group, or person.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spoonbill1963
01:41 PM on 05/27/2011
I don't think it's quite that easy.
soeasy
"Be the change you wish to see in the world"
11:27 AM on 05/16/2011
To explain to anyone who never felt hungry what hunger is, is almost impossible; so it is to some people to understand others who do not live in a safe world that they live Then, let's ask them who hire and creat jobs ? Yes, some are employed by the government, but the government can not employ everybody who is looking for a job. For example, the law, also known as "No Millionaire left behind " was renewed because it was an incentive to the small business and the big one also, to employ new people. Did they do that? And even if for the small business the excuses are somewhere valid,, how many took advantage of it and how many hired new people ? Did the banks, who received all that money, in a loan deal like from father to son, helped anyone , honest people of course, to save or buy houses and consequently to have more jobs in the construction and correlated field? , After all, how many are really hiring new employes? Or , how many are taking advantage of the situation and pushing their employers to do the job of two people? And, are there big corporations , that want to see this government to fail , doing their best to hold unemployment higher until the next election? Who has the control of hiring new people? Not me or most of you, for sure! Think about it!
04:17 PM on 05/16/2011
The Government screwed up with the bail out. Example General Motors was saved, the gm unions and pensions were saved, there should have been a loan like Chrysler received in the 70's. The big wigs at AIG and Goldman Sax got their big bonisis, the money should not have been used for that purpose. As to business they need to show a profit or they are out of business.
10:30 PM on 05/15/2011
Yes, Stephen! Yes and Yes! Thank you very much!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Not Yours
10:26 PM on 05/15/2011
The basic issue is idealogical. Republicans in general do not believe government creates jobs. Liberal in general think they do. Reality says the free market creates jobs. So, when politicians get their heads out of their idealogical dark places and focus on what actually creates jobs, then they will be created. Finger pointing, bashing, name calling, delusional rants, idealogical long winded narrow minded extravagantly worded explanations that are meaningless, etc., etc. vein popping isn't it? The most simple things are so hard in politics because there are so many close minded people.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spoonbill1963
01:43 PM on 05/27/2011
Well said and very true.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
10:13 PM on 05/15/2011
In a nutshell, here is your answer:

1. Obama is not leading so much as he is merely reacting to the dummy agenda set by the GOP.

2. The real agenda of the GOP is to impoverish the middle class and to transfer all wealth to the rich. This gets harder to do if people have jobs.

3. The dummy agenda is what the GOP tells everyone else to try and get people to vote for them so that they can pursue their real agenda. The dummy agenda is whatever works, it does not matter, actually just so long as it distracts folks, including saddly Obama.
04:31 PM on 05/16/2011
True he is not leading and never does. GOP thought wants government out of business the Dems want to control and run your business. GOP has faith in people , Dems have faith in Government. That's the bottom line.
photo
IgnoranceIsStrength
Don't ask me, Google it yourself !
09:33 PM on 05/15/2011
Republica­­­­­­ns approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke.

They stand four-squar­­­­­­e for the American home--but not for housing.

They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restrictin­­­­­­g labor's rights.

They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better.

They endorse educationa­­­­­­l opportunit­­­­­­y for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools.

They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them.

They consider electrical power a great blessing--­­­­­­but only when the private power companies get their rake-off.

They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people.

And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."

- Harry S. Truman 1947”
04:35 PM on 05/16/2011
Just shows the government screws things up. No one in their right mind think everything is fine.
We are third for sepending on Education we rank 17 in the world on Education tests. Hows that working for getting your moneys worth?
photo
Chef Typhoid Mary
Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.
09:27 PM on 05/15/2011
After 4 months of anemic Republican action on the economic front, Speaker John Boehner and the Joint Economic Committee have formulated a plan. On the second page of the executive summary titled, What and How to Cut, the Republican­­­­­­­s are demanding to “Decreasin­­­­­­­g the number and compensati­­­­­­­on of government workers”- the Republican­­­­­­­s follow up with their explanatio­­­­­­­n of the prior statement,
“A smaller government workforce increases the available supply of educated, skilled workers for private firms, thus lowering labor costs.”
For those who have a slight grasp of economics this is astonishin­­­­­­­g. Let me explain, labor costs = American wages. By increasing the supply of labor, wages decrease. This is basic economics of supply and demand. So the way the Republican­­­­­­­s want to create jobs in America is to saturate the American labor pool with more workers, increasing unemployme­­­­­­­nt, and driving down the American standard of living.
This is on their website in their own words.
http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/JEC_Jobs_Study.pdf
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
10:15 PM on 05/15/2011
Boehner is free to put his principles into action anytime he wants. He can do us all a big favor and resign.
04:37 PM on 05/16/2011
Boehner is not President, maybe he should be.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Not Yours
10:31 PM on 05/15/2011
So, the last 4 MONTHS bother you? How about the last 4 YEARS of both houses controled by one party and couldn't get it right. It seems neither party can get the idea that we cannot keep running up the debt and printing money while handing out entitlements, giving money to every nation who wants some and supporting wars that are costing a fortune. Guilty for both parties!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Renifer
Tea-Partiers are really Neo-Birchers
11:30 PM on 05/15/2011
..and 30 years of Reaganomics is what lead us down this road of destruction.
04:39 PM on 05/16/2011
You are right that is why the tea party started. Neather party gets it. When are we going to withdraw out troups . We won. Where is the plan to get out?
09:27 PM on 05/15/2011
At the highest level, I feel it’s because the vast majority accept the color of their party hat as being the most important aspect of government. We don’t seem to recognize, or want to accept, that the electoral timeline plays a very important part of our government’s overall productivity. We give little consideration to lame duck sessions being some of our most productive government sessions.

If you ask me it boils down to our electoral stems from communications that is long since archaic . I much rather see shorter terms without limits than continue with this current model. Let’s take the current administration as example (who I did support) There was never a better time in US history for the next new deal! Creating jobs through energy would have been huge and made Obama a legacy! Instead he opted to Bush bash until we all pleaded for it to stop. His only deliverable was a pretty bad excuse for a healthcare reform until he did a hail mary pass to kill Bin Laden. Now we'll be off to our traditional pre-election fuel cost reduction before heading back to the campaign trail. On the trail we'll hear....'We've done so much" blah blah blah "We have so much more to do" blah blah and moved to a (staged) questions and (canned) answer session....Now back to business as usual because "Yes, we can!" :(
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
The Lone Stranger
Yes, I am a lousy typist. OK!
10:17 PM on 05/15/2011
but other than that, I totally agree. Obama is no leader. he merely reacts to events swirling around him.
08:54 PM on 05/15/2011
If we could ever get past the paralyzing paradigm that government is responsible for creating jobs, we would begin heading in the right direction.
09:13 PM on 05/15/2011
Thank You!!! I mean really, where did it come from that government creates jobs?!?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Renifer
Tea-Partiers are really Neo-Birchers
11:32 PM on 05/15/2011
Because they create the environment that businesses can operate. Governments created the rules of the playing field, without which you have anarchy and thievery.
Governments can and do create jobs. FDR did it. It's well documented. Look it up.
09:44 PM on 05/15/2011
We lost jobs because of gov't policies over the last 30 or 34 years. It's true that they can't undo the harm they have done, and since they did it deliberately, it's unlikely that they will undo it!!!!!
04:59 PM on 05/16/2011
True, look at the mess in California we have so many regulations that our companies are moving out of state to Texas, Nevada, Regulations, Taxes and Red tape do make a diffrence, ask any small business person.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Enroh Mot
Veritas Lux Mea
08:00 PM on 05/15/2011
Wall Street doesn't care about job creation.......except in China.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
samtee
Shankapotomus.
07:32 PM on 05/15/2011
Becausr Obama want you to depend on government.