I tend to agree. however the problem is not too many idles workers, it’s not enough work. Putting older workers on the sideline when they can still contribute is a waste of money.

This direction of thinking became obsolete when we ended the gold standard. It is hard to get the mind around, but this is better suited to personal finance, not that of the monopoly issuer of the currency that has an infinite supply of that currency and is only limited by inflation. Waste of money is not an issue for such a government as long as the real goods and services the money is created to deploy exist and can be purchased in US dollars, which is just about anything in the world.

The concept that each worker must "earn" their right to exist and share in productivity is moot when one considers that aggregate productivity is higher than it has ever been. Many of those workers would likely continue to contribute, but in various different capacities. Or, they could simply continue in their roles as always, but the choice would be theirs and those who did decide to leave the workforce could be provided for while also allowing others to move up into their jobs.

I don’t have a solid solution, but we have to think in terms of creating more work that produces tangible results.

This is the language of our oppressors and the sooner we realize that the sooner we can make them irrelevant to the public purpose and end their economic terrorism that creates this thinking process. There is no shortage of productive work available, as a short walk through any major city or small rural town can show. It just doesn't offer the profit potential that the corporate shareholders demand of companies.

Beyond just allowing people to retire at an earlier age with dignity, we can also provide public service jobs for younger workers who can't find work or simply want to opt out of the corporate system. Many of them could find satisfying work mitigating climate change or renovating abandoned industrial areas for new purposes if they know they have a paycheck and benefits available.

This public service work would then set the bottom for wages and benefits within the private sector, forcing employers to outbid the program. The federal government only needs to set some guidelines and provide funding, letting state and local representatives determine how to best use the labor force offered.

Instead of debating whether child care is infrastructure — it’s not — we should be building a cheap high speed, wide bandwidth national wifi system.

There is no need to choose or to think in terms of "instead" debates centered around the fiction of limited funding. Only resources can be limited, not dollars. We are part of the most wealthy economy in the history of this earth and we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

WE should also be looking at reforming high schools so they can strat taching kids how to read, write, do a little math, and most impoirtatnly think independantly, creatively

I fully agree with and support this. However, that doesn't mean that is "all" we can do unless we continue to accept the lies and propaganda that make the choices contingent on "finding" money when simply spending it is how we find it.