They all involve science and technology. Going from the grandest to the mundane, they include things like: engineering and putting in place a planetary defense system to protect the Earth against probable asteroids strikes; engineering and putting in place a electromagnetic pulse defense system to prevent the destruction of the infrastructure that is the basis for all of our economic and social systems; designing and putting in place a deep water port system which will be needed to sustain imports an exports and be secure; participating in cross state programs to deal with the effects of long term drought and thereby protecting our food production system; putting in place a cyber security system to protect the systems which are the basis for virtually all knowledge and transaction systems; etc. We could keep peeling the onion back and examining worthwhile things that affect the viability of the country; and then establish priorities based upon our abilities to get them done. Each institution (state, local, public and private) needs to seek out and select the best opportunities they have to make a difference.

As for Perry’s claim, I’m not sure what he said; and I don’t really know how many jobs have actually been created. I doubt that anyone really does. The raw aggregate numbers period to period taken as a whole are very worrisome.

The biggest part of the projects offered are the infrastructures spending and the continued suspension of the payroll taxes which fund Social Security, a program which its auditors say already has serious actuarial shortfalls. My guess is that many of the infrastructure spending projects will take much longer than expected to initiate; and a rush to do them may fund may be suboptimal. An alternative approach on infrastructure spending would be to identify infrastructure spending that yields the most value to the economy and the functioning of the nation. I’m not at all sure that the best ones will be chosen.

Some of the other proposals will have little or no effect. Businesses will not hire people because there is a small, short-term tax incentive. When additional people need to be hired, most employers look for the people they think will do the best job for them. All others things being equal, then they might be influenced to hire veterans or the long term unemployed.

To deal with veteran unemployment and the long term unemployed begs correctly identifying the reasons. I haven’t studied the situation, but I have a few guesses. Veteran unemployment may have to do with relatively few people serving in the military, and being out of the workforce for awhile. Couple this with the high incidence of PTSD, and we are starting to approach root causes: deploying people who serve less often, finding more ways for people to serve, and training people while in the military for post military careers.

It is difficult to deal with the long term unemployed without helping bring back manufacturing to the United States. The loss of manufacturing jobs for decades has destroyed the life chances of millions of people. This means we need to incent manufacturing to be done here and trade opportunities need to be opened up. This means helping fast track business expansions. It also means using the valuable resources we have in a responsible way. Whole communities, for instance, in the Northwest have been destroyed when the Forest Service has withheld public lands from sustainable forestry. Many of the same problems exist with our energy resources, depletable and renewable.

Unemployment among minorities in inner cities is far too hard and has created a devastated underclass. This is an intractable problem, but it is worth exploring tax incented redevelopment, enterprise zones with trade preferences. The most humane thing that we can do is deal with structural issues and strive for full employment in my opinion. We need to take advantage of our strengths.

I have not heard any Republican economic proposals (that Obama has not also proposed) that would not further increase the income disparity in this country, which is very destructive, or take us back to the environment that got our economy into this mess in the first place.

Cash flow projections take into account the length of time it takes to get things done. Regulatory and other roadblocks extend payouts, reduce returns and reduce the number of projects that can be financed. All cash flows are on an after tax basis. If effective tax rates are not competitive, then the other revenue and cost factors must be exceptional to carry them. This is one reason why uncompetitive tax rates have led to increased investments outside of the United States. The resultant cash flows outside of the United States infrequently come back to the United States due to the high tax costs of bringing them back.

Uncertainty raises the hurdle rates for longer-term investments. Higher risks require higher rewards. Uncertainty in most the elements used to construct projected cash flows is causing most businesses to hibernate.

In the short-term, most businesses can use existing workforces and unused capacity to deal with short-term increases in demand that is viewed as temporary in nature. This is one of the reasons why governmental stimulus rarely yields the desired effect. Creating more sustainable jobs requires businesses to make longer-term investment commitments.

Longer-term business investments require commitments from investors and bankers. If projected after-tax returns are inadequate in one country, then investors will try to find adequate returns in others. If paying dividends is no longer an efficient way to reward investors, then dividend payouts may be reduced in favor of things that enhance the value of the business. Businesses may use this cash to invest in themselves through investments such as acquisitions and share buybacks.

I really don’t think that most policy proposals take into account how businesses work.