Of course, "there is an important government role." Mulhern's concept is "employment compensation." This farcical phrase would allow a worker who has lost their job and is staring at six months of making $362 a week on unemployment to hand over the entire $9,412 to a new employer as incentive to hire them. He fails to mention that this cost would come directly from the previous employer, who would have to make $9,412 of cuts.

But it's not until you combine both Mulherns that you get a fully foolish policy proposal. Last week, Daniel and Jennifer rolled out a 6-point jobs plan that claims to "throw out the old theories" while rehashing the failed theories of Obama and Keynes.

1. Tax job-providers more. Or as the Granholms put it, give job-providers "incentives" (new taxes) to inspire job-providers to voluntarily pay even more of the corporate taxes that Dan and Jen later say are too high.

2. Spend the money from point #1 on technologies that don't exist and for which there is no market. Or as they put it, "require cash-hungry states to collaborate with (the heavily subsidized and politically correct part of) the private sector.

3. Spend more money and coerce banks to make loans they otherwise wouldn't. The Granholms - whose resumes are a list of government and non-profit jobs - compare this "Jobs Race to the Top" program with the one rare Obama initiative that made sense, their public education "Race to the Top" program. However, that program only worked because it bribed state governments and school districts to reign in their teacher unions and adopt actual standards. The Granholm RTT would only dole out corporate welfare to failures like the recently exposed Solyndra or Michigan's misguided film tax credits which cost two taxpayer dollars for every one dollar in temporary jobs.

4. Lower the corporate tax rate. You know, that corporate tax rate mentioned in point #1 that the big bad private sector is scurrying overseas to avoid so they can keep employing people. This is actually a good idea Republicans have been advocating for years.

5. Spend more money attempting to guess what skills the jobs of the future will require.

6. Force people to buy the subsidized products from point #2 by making popular technologies more expensive with higher taxes.