User talk:Glenne1949

November 2012
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Job creation program. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Man way  05:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Editing your Wikopedia article on "Jobs Creation? made me SAD because of the existing misplaced emphasis upon non-proprietary programs sponsored under Federal auspices. Federally sponsored jobs like WPA or Peace Corp are typically non-permanent. The more permanent jobs, those that have contributed to our high standard of living have historically been proprietary in nature, coming both from the private sector and individual inventors, often inventing outside their respective areas of expertise who created things  essential to our living. Such a program that I mentioned, DOE's private sector inventors' program has proven results to demonstrate an alternative option that would be more effective in generating PRIVATE SECTOR job and with a high  degree of marketing impact as shown (an average $8 sales revenue for every one dollar of program money spent).

Your editing rules do not allow me to mention private sector initiatives instead emphasizing non-proprietary technology initiated under Federal auspices. Which emphasis I believe would not create a successful jobs creating program, especially having impact on a nation-wide basis. I do not believe a Federal program would consistently produce permanent private sector jobs (it never has), at least not in sufficient quantity needed to spur the economy today (see my accompanying analysis of DOE's ENERGY RELATED INVENTIONS PROGRAM. And mine is not the "discussion of opinions," instead being the discussion of RESULTS from a Federally sponsored final report. With this I suppose I have nothing further to offer.

Glenne1949@aol.com