What job will cause a long term boost in economy?

Nationally funded  ER rooms with allowances for non long trained AMA personal would provide long term new jobs that would boost economy, provide low cost competition to ridiculously overpriced current helathcare system and be a start to a national health care system.

Such a system would provide long term higher paying skilled jobs with new healthcare workers that would carry the economy for years. So healthcare then is not a long term negative but a positive.
You don't need doctors trained for years to do most things. Other nations have proven this.They use one specialist with only 6 months dedicated training in sutures, one in broken bones etc. overseen by one General practiioner. This dramatically lowers the cost of helathcare too and provides BETTER expertise than GP's.

Let voters in this forum to continually rank their top 10 favorite ideas.   Give each idea that's ranked in a top 10 a point value for it's rank.  10 point, 9 points, 8 points, etc.  This will show which ideas are truly seen as the best and most urgent of the bunch.

Start a program scanning the library of congress into an online library where it can be accessed for free.  It would make it so much easier and cheaper for public/ school libraries to offer the people they serve quality access to knowledge.  Going hand in hand with the plan already in place to drastically expand broadband lines and invest in 21st century schools, this would do much to improve American education while making it more cost effective.  It would also save money and the enviornement by reducing the amount of paper purchased by the government when stocking multiple libraries with the same books.

Once again you have front loaded the voting results by allowing voting directly from the list of most popular entries.  The results being so biased against later entries that the resulting rankings are completely unreliable as an indicator of which topics are actually most important to participants much less to the American public.  To achieve a more accurate vote, up or down voting on the lists should not be allowed.  Voting should be only on questions randomly selected from all entries, a minimum number of votes should be cast (perhaps 100) before an entry is placed on the most popular list, and rankings should be on the percentage of up/down votes.  Hopefully you will be able to emplement changes such as these and produce a more representative picture of America's concerns.  Other than that, what you've been doing is really super, thanks!

Although students in general (undergraduate and graduate) are facing increasing cost in tuition and fees, one of the key items that no one addresses is the cost of living expenses. Graduate students pay for expenses in terms of rent and utilities (with no subsidies) and are barely paid above minimum wage through teaching and research assistantships if fortunate to attain such assistantships. Such commitments consume a minimum of 20 hours (for a monthly stipend of $1400.00). This consumption of time results in the graduate student pro-longing their time span of matriculation by enrolling in a maximum of six hours while balancing priorities in research. Meanwhile, students who take out loans throughout graduate school in addition to undergraduate school are not allowed to consolidate as long as they are enrolled as full-time students.

By forcing graduate students to pay taxes on fellowhips for expenses such as room and board, students are being partially robbed of attaining financial assistance outside of loans or part-time jobs (either outside or through an assistantship) that may conflict with research time. Personally, I feel this is a gross form of taxation when graduate students perform research that is a form of service to this country that may or may not be sponsored by industry.

If the U.S. is to increase the number of doctors, scientists, and engineers who will un-doubtfully come more so from those classes that is not priviledged, the tax policy regarding taxes on fellowhips needs to be repealed.

Many posts are being categorized by the posters inappropriately. I suspect they figure they will get more exposure by cross posting, but when I click on Education I am not interested in wading through posts on everything.

The best would be if every item starts off cross posted and then drops out of categories in which most users negate that category. Posters would not have to do the extra step and people like me who are motivated to eliminate the inappropriate items would do the work.

Sir
    The stimulus to the magnitude proposed is a mistake in the long-term, and affirms that monetary currencies are a farce beyond comprehension of the average mind. Why don't we take advantage of our weak economy and " strong " dollar to buy food from Brazil and Argentina, use people with disabilities to package it here (while paying a decent wage), and sell to Asia? Or, stop wasting the surplus our own country has and do the same thing. Use resources you already posess. People with disabilities are a viable option for job creation and productivity; oh, and to save the housing market. It's Biblical,
                                              Ryno

 The voting system is joke.  Many people are not well informed about many candidates and may just vote for them because they've seen alot of politcial signs and billboards with their name on it.  When we go to the voting booth, all we see is a name and a party.  Sure alot of people may pay attention to the Presidential election and be well informed.  But what about all the judges and other positions.  There is nothing there to even make an informed decision.  The technology is now cheap and advanced enough to have touch screen compures that could launch commercials and provide a candidates qualifications and positions on a number of issues right at the booth.  Let's provide all Americans with enough information at the voting booth, so they can make informed decisions about what they are voting for.

My suggestion does not address any one issue as much as it is about how I hope you, President-Elect Obama, choose to address the people.

I voted for you, Pres-Elect, because you inspired me.  You inspired me to work for change at a time when I couldn't figure out what to do to make a difference.  You said call - we did, many for the first time and introduced you to our fellow citizens.  You said canvass, we did until the wee hours, too.  What I fear is that in this turbulent time, we will all become so bedazzled by bailouts and foreign wars that we will stop talking about what WE, the PEOPLE, need to do in our own chairs to make a difference.  While it is apparent that government will play a role in reenergizing our economy and securing our borders, I know that you have to play a vital role in turning the cogs of such a large, complex institution.  But sir, I am still awaiting your instruction, not just the stimulus!  What should WE be doing.  I feel like we should be hearing things like:

 - Change Your Personal Monetary Policy, become wealth managers instead of debt managers, save more than you spend

- Learn to be content with less as we recover our markets; You could buy that 5000 sq. ft. home on the cheap right now or you could save the extra $2000/mo in order to increase wealth.  Won't consumer confidence grow as the consumer themselves become more solvent

- Volunteer in your community: help your neighbors during this tough time.  If your neighbors are suffering, the community is suffering.  Etc...

We need to hear these things from YOU, Mr. President-Elect.  We need your administration to call cadence for those of us who can march while you are helping those not yet in position.  Keep us busy with things we can grapple with so I don't have to hear my neighbor complaining about things they don't fully understand - like banking, the economy and foreign policy.  

Please don't forget about us.  We are ready!!!

Thank you and I look forward to being of service to my country, again!

Dear President Obama:

 

Congressman John Conyers has reintroduce HR 676, his single-payer healthcare bill in the 111th Congress.

 

Former Sen. Tom Daschle, your nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, once called for "a government-run insurance program modeled after Medicare" in testimony before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions as part of the solution to our healthcare crisis.

 

This is fine, if it means “Medicare for All.”  The problem is not to pressure big insurance companies to make health care “affordable.”  The problem is to provide the American people with an alterative to the monopoly they currently have, and abuse.

 

In August of 2005, The National Coalition on Health Care found in a fiscal analysis of health care reform that "the single payer model would reduce costs by over $1.1 trillion over the next decade while providing comprehensive benefits to all Americans." Single-payer is the only reform proposal that can claim cost savings and comprehensive health care for all.

 

Some argue that HR 676 is "not politically feasible," but that's a chicken's protest, not an acceptable position. We elect our government officials to serve the public interest, and the public overwhelmingly supports a national health care plan.

 

HR 676 would help control costs by emphasizing prevention and universal access to basic care instead of reliance on emergency room care--the most costly and least efficient method of healthcare delivery. We can't afford not to adopt HR 676.

 

HR 676 would improve healthcare outcomes and eliminate racial, geographic and other disparities which currently plague our nation.

 

All the other advanced democracies adopted national healthcare, none have seriously considered eliminating these systems, and all enjoy better healthcare results than we do including: longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality rates, fewer work-days lost to illness, and many other measures of health and wellness.

  

I urge you to reject policies that are friendly to for-profit health care corporations, which put private profits over public health and will not and cannot solve our healthcare crisis.

 

William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.