Former White House of Purple State/Marokai Blue

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Question though Mr President,

The problem with our significant unemployment rate is that since there has been one stimulus package... what's to say that a second one will stem the bleeding?

My suggestion, if I may be so bold, is to examine which areas of the economy are sliding, and then direct specialised support, and make sure that that involves long-term viability. For example what about tax-credits that actually rewards businesses that can take on extra employees? Many business can actually afford to bring-on people, but they're hesitant. Giving them money doesn't fix anything, but giving them money IF they actually do something, and stick to it, makes sense to me.

You actually want to cure the patient rather than tending to the symptoms surely?

 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It would be worth investigating the 'returns' of the stimulus. It is possible, indeed probable that we pumped money into important struggling industries, but industries which do not employ significant numbers of people. Unless public subsidy is sustained, industries in receipt of assistance are not willing to employ new workers (and it would cost them money to lay off workers too) should that assistance cease.

I would agree that conditional tax credits coupled with SEDZ's etc are better ways to incentivise business to generate employment. However, while increasing employment is a long term goal that in itself will not automatically decrease unemployment as the cause of unemployment can be due to a variety of economic, social and health related factors. That is worth investigating.

Obviously you cannot fix all the reasons why people are unemployed, . But basically, my personal view is doing what you can in the most effective way possible.
I think you'll do a great job.