- Hirschhorn: Greed...or Fear
- Schork Oil Outlook: Some New Hope For Nat Gas Bulls
- Insights for Growing the Economy: the State of Entrepreneurship
- Tamminen: California Is At It Again
- Dorn: Trading Secrets and Serendipity
- Schork Oil Outlook: Falling Demand and Falling Production—The Race is On
- Busch: Ron Paul Fed Day
- Geithner Tells Banks To Make More Risky Loans?
- Farr: It Can Go Higher
- Jon Henes: Evolution From Trader to Owner - The Making of the Private Equity Hedge Fund
MOST SHARED
- Nielsen Ratings Coming to Video Games
- Volt Drive: Great Ride, Interesting Interior and a Friendly Chirp
- US Wants China to Buy into Its Small Banks
- Warren Buffett to CNBC: Curbing Fed's Independence Could Lead to 'Mischief'
- Hot Topics at TEDMED
- This Holiday Season—Little Joy For Those Hard Hit
- Confessions of a Black Friday Shopper
- Time Lapse World Series Is A Great Play
- Nov. 20: Unusual Volume Leaders
- How Stock Investors Can Play Holiday Travel
- Time Lapse World Series Is A Great Play
- Hirschhorn: Greed...or Fear
- My Top 10 Tech Toys for the Holidays
- iPhone a Better Gaming Platform Than Android?
- May Day For Dendreon
- 100% Mortgage Financing From USDA
- Holiday Tipping: Who And How Much
- Deep Discounts Should Make It a Very Tech-y Holiday
- Bullish Sign for Gold: Central Banks Are Big Buyers
- Hershey's Trust Pushes for Cadbury Bid: Report
- Joblessness Rose Further In Many States Last Month
- Victoria's Secret Hopes to Rekindle Desire for Lingerie
- High Roller Sues Harrah's for Lost Millions
- Nielsen Ratings Coming to Video Games
- Wall Street Jobs Slow to Return Despite Record Profits
- Big Shareholders Ask Goldman to Cut Bonuses: Report
- Buying an Expensive House? Government Can Help
RSS FEED
CNBC Guest Blog
Text Size 
William Dunkelberg
Economic Strategist,
Boenning & Scattergood
Administration officials have admitted that the “Stimulus Package” hasn’t been very stimulating.
So now, some in Congress are considering “Stimulus II”, which may take the form of a jobs tax credit similar to that enacted in 1976-77. Some feel this was a successful program, creating new jobs. But it is likely that “government job creation” is an oxymoron. Government has no money to hire someone or subsidize the hiring of a worker.
 |
Such a program does not pass a simple “smell test” of logic.
Even a minimum wage worker costs about $20,000 (all in).
Who would spend $20,000 to get a $3000 credit, for example, if there were no use for the worker (e.g. the worker could not generate more than $17,000 in revenue to cover the cost of hiring).
Firms will not hire people to just stand around, and cannot pay workers more than the revenue they generate for the firm. With weak consumer demand, more workers are apparently not needed and owners are not hiring.
A jobs credit won't bring in more sales.
Such a program, if passed, would be the “cash for clunkers” program for the job market, pulling hiring into the tax credit period from future periods. Hiring might even be delayed in anticipation of the program if it is proposed in Congress and debated for a period of time. And, unless prevented, such a subsidy proposal might induce some firms to release workers and re-hire them as “new”.
Such a program will involve red tape and complex formulas to compute credits, and most if not all of the money will be paid for workers that would be hired anyway. All this would not induce many consumers to increase their spending, the top need identified by business owners. Labor is cheap, customers are needed. Maybe giving the money to consumers would be simpler.
When consumer spending picks up, firms will have reason to hire (and banks will have a reason to lend to them when asked).
___________________
William Dunkelberg is an Economic Strategist, Boenning & Scattergood and Chief Economist, National Federation of Independent Business.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes