With an unemployment rate above 9% a $14.3Trillion national debt (with proposed cuts of $2Trillion) expected to grow another $7+Trillion, spending at approximately 25% of GDP, roughly 43% of all spending is on credit, and GDP growing at less than 2% - something must be done to encourage economic growth and thus job creation. This will surely be an issue in the 2012 Presidential election. More jobs equals more tax revenue to the Government to pay it's obligations. I think everyone can agree on this point? The debate over how to create jobs typically boils down to 2 arguments. 1.) Government funded jobs 2.) Private sector jobs Government funded jobs require borrowing more (than the current 43% of spending) and increasing the national debt accordingly. The Government can create jobs 3 basic ways; a.) hire Government workers, b.) enter into contracts with private companies, or c.) finance projects. In the context of this debate, the Government spending is typically categorized as "stimulus". Some of this "stimulus" spending is for a short term and specific amount - some of the spending will require an ongoing and increasing spending committment. A long term plan considered to be a "jobs creator" is the healthcare reform legislation often referred to as "Obamacare". This Bill expands the size and scope of Government and imposes additional regulatory control over the burgeoning health care and insurance industries. Private sector job growth requires private investment - that is risk of capital. The motive for making an investment and taking a financial risk in the private sector - is profit (not discussing charities nor Government contractors). Part of any long term business plan is an understanding of tax and regulatory requirements. A major concern in the private sector is uncertainty about future tax rates - given the Government's need for additional revenue. Another uncertainty in the private sector is the continued expansion of Government regulations - we can explore those regulations in this thread. The title of this thread indicates job creation is the key to protecting entitlement programs in the long term. IMO -the best way to meet the obligations to beneficiaries is to increase the number of taxpayers - spread the risk and not be dependent upon any one group. Others may argue the "rich" people (earn more than $250,000 per year) can pay more - but they may be subject to business losses and eventually they retire as well. Accordingly, I'd like to explore Government programs designed to create jobs and regulatory effects on job creation. I found a few links that touch on the subject to start the discussion. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/09/AR2011020906493.html http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/-278k-per-stimulus-job-white-house-says-no.html http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/02/01/obamas-2011-budget-targeted-stimulus-focused-on-jobs/ The last article touches on targeted tax credits to help business - this will undoubedtly be part of the discussion - some will argue there is proof that tax cuts don't work. IMO - tax cuts are not the final solution as the full impact of tax cuts are neutralized by increased regulation.