Skip to content
Sign up free
News

Reductionist Debate on Job Creation Defies Reality

Reductionist Debate on Job Creation Defies Reality

By Loretta Breuning

2-minute read

I’m usually very choosy about my information sources, but a walk through an airport yesterday assaulted me with headlines on newsstands and monitors. One caption stopped me in my tracks : "Can government create jobs?"

I've waited decades for that question. When I studied Economics in college, it was taken for granted that government can and should create jobs. Since then, candidates and media have continued presupposing this role for government. At long last, this election cycle may stimulate debate on an issue that needs debating.

But the timing of the question is curious. It appeared on a major news channel whose editors are almost exclusively Democrats. Why would Democrats be editorializing about government's lack of accountability for jobs after positioning themselves as the good-for-jobs party for so many years? Obviously, because Democrats would benefit from the “don’t blame the economy on us” perspective at this moment. But what about after the election? Would all those Democrats stop expecting the government to put chickens in their pots?

That would be a win for the country as far as I’m concerned. If Democrats won votes by shifting thinking toward realistic expectations, I would celebrate. If Republicans won by appealing to realistic expectations, I would celebrate. Partisans of both stripes might see it as cynical retreat, but independents know that political discourse must help adults come to terms with the fact that a leader cannot really protect you the way an alpha baboon protects a baboon troop from a lion. Politicians cannot lead you to food the way an alpha chimpanzee leads a troop to food. They can’t find you water in a drought the way an alpha elephant does. Instead of expecting too much from your leaders and being frustrating, we can appreciate the fact that we don't give up our autonomy to our leaders as much as baboons, chimps and elephants do.

My hopes were dashed this morning. No tidal wave of challenge to the job-creation view of government appeared in the media. I should have known that from the wording of the question. If the question were “Does government affect job creation?” instead of “Can the government create jobs?” then broader issues would be on the table. Such complex questions may not appeal to poets who are listening for a New-Deal-style job corps for poets. Some people may be waiting for the government to promise them their dream job saving puppies, designing computer games, or planting organic nettles. But voters in the privacy of their homes may be saying: “it’s not realistic to expect leaders to get everyone their dream job.”

Tags: News

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Nonpartisan Issues. Diverse Perspectives.

Check your inbox and click the link to confirm.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Set the canonical URL of your copy to the original IVN article (the HTML we give you includes the tag).
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Reductionist Debate on Job Creation Defies Reality

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us