Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs

[TexaninVA]

“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs”

This statement was recently made by a leading national figure. I have deliberately omitted the name and source of the quote to avoid making it political.

I’m more interested in the philosophical mindset of someone who would actually attempt to make this argument. Not only does it fly recklessly into the face of reality, it seems to reveal the inner collectivist poking its head out.

So the question I have is ... if business and entrepreneurs do not create jobs, who does??

[TheVillageChicken]

Had to keep it non-political when the implication is that we need bigger government.

[Villagesperson]

“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs”

This statement was recently made by a leading national figure. I have deliberately omitted the name and source of the quote to avoid making it political.

I’m more interested in the philosophical mindset of someone who would actually attempt to make this argument. Not only does it fly recklessly into the face of reality, it seems to reveal the inner collectivist poking its head out.

So the question I have is ... if business and entrepreneurs do not create jobs, who does??

When I read that she had said that, my jaw dropped.

It has really become less than subtle recently hasn't it ?

[gomoho]

The man in the moon?

[ugotme]

GEEZ - "She" hasn't made sense about a lot of things - In my opinion, of course.

[Sandtrap328]

I have not seen this speech yet. In exactly what context was that phrase taken and can you link to the speech?

[TexaninVA]

I have not seen this speech yet. In exactly what context was that phrase taken and can you link to the speech?

I want to keep all politicians names off this thread so I'll send you a PM with the link

[Sandtrap328]

I want to keep all politicians names off this thread so I'll send you a PM with the link

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America.

Listen to the entire speech instead of just 13 words and you just might come away with some insight on what was said.

Too many people just listen for a tiny phrase of what was said and try to make that sound like the speaker does not have a clue instead of listening to the entire explanation of what was said.

[Madelaine Amee]

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America.

Listen to the entire speech instead of just 13 words and you just might come away with some insight on what was said.

Too many people just listen for a tiny phrase of what was said and try to make that sound like the speaker does not have a clue instead of listening to the entire explanation of what was said.

:BigApplause:

[rubicon]

There are two ways to grow jobs, the right way and the wrong way. for the last six years the only segment growing has been government. When government grows essential resources are used up to produce nothing while taxpayers burden is increased. Not only is growth and production stopped so is innovation Central planning as seen in the FED (central banks) have yielded Wall Street a 75% return while starving seniors. With all of government's monetary policy they have been unable to life us back to robust GDP despite the fact the recession ended 2009. Government has therefore decided that housing is the key to lifting the economy and has ruled the same irresponsible underwriting practices to secure a mortgage setting us up for a second housing bubble.

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economics

[JB in TV]

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America....(snip)



And yet millions of Americans, many who complain about jobs going off shore, support this by standing in line for hours to buy their iPhones, from an AMERICAN company, built where? CHINA!

[TexaninVA]

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America.

Listen to the entire speech instead of just 13 words and you just might come away with some insight on what was said.

Too many people just listen for a tiny phrase of what was said and try to make that sound like the speaker does not have a clue instead of listening to the entire explanation of what was said.

Uh, I did listen to it in full. The interesting point to me, as I said, is the collectivist mindset that seems to poke its head out.

Trickle down has become a worn out phrase ... fix the tax laws and open up energy production in a more fulsome manner ... the jobs and wealth will return. I really have never understood why a lot of people don't get that. Anyway, thanks for your comments.

[TexaninVA]

There are two ways to grow jobs, the right way and the wrong way. for the last six years the only segment growing has been government. When government grows essential resources are used up to produce nothing while taxpayers burden is increased. Not only is growth and production stopped so is innovation Central planning as seen in the FED (central banks) have yielded Wall Street a 75% return while starving seniors. With all of government's monetary policy they have been unable to life us back to robust GDP despite the fact the recession ended 2009. Government has therefore decided that housing is the key to lifting the economy and has ruled the same irresponsible underwriting practices to secure a mortgage setting us up for a second housing bubble.

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economics

You make an excellent point ... people who complain about income inequality overlook the obvious .... the Fed has been the single largest contributor to this phenomena in the past few years. Printing money on a massive scale will do that.

The "deficit" in understanding here is all about economics and markets

[Polar Bear]

If you don't believe in capitalism, free enterprise, and the private sector, then you don't believe in the principles upon which our country was founded.

[TexaninVA]

If you don't believe in capitalism, free enterprise, and the private sector, then you don't believe in the principles upon which our country was founded.

Correct.

Another way of putting this is ... if you don't believe in the items you mentioned, that what you do believe in (whether it's recognized or not) is poverty, corruption and statism complete with crony "capitalism"

[Sandtrap328]

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economics

A couple of days ago there was a thread here on Gasoline Prices. One conservative poster wrote something like, "What happened to Buy American when the price of imported gasoline is less than what the drilling costs are in this country?" That is not an exact quote but very close to her post.

So, the free market system is best in this instance as well?

[Irishmen]

When we grew up, we spent within what we earned and saved so we could buy a house and provide a comfortable living for our families. Today, too many people are living a champagne life on a beer budget. They want what the neighbors have and to do without they say is wrong and unjust.

[onslowe]

She knows who'll create jobs - she knows much more than all of us. "Bigger government, smiley faced fascism, behavior modification, reliance on government, entitlement, these are a few of my favorite things.

[billethkid]

If you don't believe in capitalism, free enterprise, and the private sector, then you don't believe in the principles upon which our country was founded.


She is showing her ignorance to those who know better. And unfortunately she is pattering to her followers who must unfortunately believe the smut she is peddaling.

Or we could use one of her other well emphasized quotes in a national crisis:

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE???

The subject of where jobs come from should be a banner issue that underscores ones incompetence as well as her view of her constituents.

[Polar Bear]

A couple of days ago there was a thread here on Gasoline Prices. One conservative poster wrote something like, "What happened to Buy American when the price of imported gasoline is less than what the drilling costs are in this country?" That is not an exact quote but very close to her post.

So, the free market system is best in this instance as well?


Yes. If American energy producers weren't operating under such constraining rules and regulations, the cost of imported energy would not be less than energy produced in America.

[Sandtrap328]

I would hope all in this thread are going to vote Novemner 4 because the tax and spenders are mobilizing their troops to come get what you've earned.

Yes, we are! :thumbup: Just wait until November, 2016, too. :D

[janmcn]

I would hope all in this thread are going to vote Novemner 4 because the tax and spenders are mobilizing their troops to come get what you've earned.

Yes we are, can't wait :thumbup:

[graciegirl]

Now back to capitalism versus socialism or whatever we were talking about.

[Hancle704]

In the days of the Soviet Union, government created most jobs. Unfortunately they were to produce items that people did not want or, that didn't last. Interesting how things have changed since it collapsed. Too bad we now have pols who want to duplicate that experiment. The same pols who may never have worked in any field where they produced a product, created a job or had to be responsible for a firm's profitability and survival.

[Steve9930]

“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs”

This statement was recently made by a leading national figure. I have deliberately omitted the name and source of the quote to avoid making it political.

I’m more interested in the philosophical mindset of someone who would actually attempt to make this argument. Not only does it fly recklessly into the face of reality, it seems to reveal the inner collectivist poking its head out.

So the question I have is ... if business and entrepreneurs do not create jobs, who does??

They Magically Appear!

[rubicon]

Yes. If American energy producers weren't operating under such constraining rules and regulations, the cost of imported energy would not be less than energy produced in America.

Polar Bear: spot on

But for the free enterprise wildcatters who moved forward with fracking the Energy Dept would be scratching their heads. government picks losers wind solar are failing and shown not to be environmental friendly as greenies purport. Free market free up so much oil so what did government do refused Keystone. so free market went to plan B and moved it by railroad. Boom government comes back with superficial safety rules to stop shipping by rail.

A classic example of what the effect of government regulation compare USA trains compared to Japan China France Russia.

Dodd Frank is destroying business with its stupid regulations which by the way do nothing to protect too big to fail .

We need to eliminate the FED Dept of Energy, Dept of Education, to start

[charlie49]

Regardless of tax breaks, business owners will not hire people when demand for their product is low and inventory is high. Middle class wages have been stagnant and declining for years, the American consumer is weak. Lower paying service jobs have replaced many of the better paying manufacturing jobs lost to other countries.

Unfortunately the changing global economy has produced very cheap labor in countries evolving from a farming to an industial economy. Neither political party can change this and how it effects our economy.

[Indydealmaker]

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America.

Listen to the entire speech instead of just 13 words and you just might come away with some insight on what was said.

Too many people just listen for a tiny phrase of what was said and try to make that sound like the speaker does not have a clue instead of listening to the entire explanation of what was said.

Major shareholders of corporations that go offshore are union pension funds, who along with other shareholders push public companies for more and more profit. These same shareholders also push corporate boards to reward executives who put shareholder interests ahead of the actual company. I think many anti-corporate people need to look a little closer to home for blame, like into your own pension structures.

[kittygilchrist]

The man in the moon?

And pimps.

[tedquick]

And pimps.

Kitty!!!

[tedquick]

There are two ways to grow jobs, the right way and the wrong way. for the last six years the only segment growing has been government. When government grows essential resources are used up to produce nothing while taxpayers burden is increased. Not only is growth and production stopped so is innovation Central planning as seen in the FED (central banks) have yielded Wall Street a 75% return while starving seniors. With all of government's monetary policy they have been unable to life us back to robust GDP despite the fact the recession ended 2009. Government has therefore decided that housing is the key to lifting the economy and has ruled the same irresponsible underwriting practices to secure a mortgage setting us up for a second housing bubble.

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economics

Rubicon, you are dead nuts on!! It really is almost too simple. We, the producers, make the products that the market place purchases. The government taxes the producers. We pay the taxes and the government wastes most of it. We make it. They take it. We are the makers and they are the takers. They produce *nothing*! While there are certain programs that are needed, primarily that of protection, the government has gotten terribly out of hand. It has become a breeding ground for power and wealth; power over the people and wealth (that you and I generate) which they misappropriate into their own pockets.

As we've all heard I'm sure; "our government is the worst in the world except for all of the others".

Private industry creates the jobs and expands the economy. Government takes from production and adds to its power and base. Our economy will never truly recover until and when we downsize the monster that we've allowed to metastasize.

[Sandtrap328]

Rubicon, you are dead nuts on!! It really is almost too simple. We, the producers, make the products that the market place purchases. The government taxes the producers. We pay the taxes and the government wastes most of it. We make it. They take it. We are the makers and they are the takers. They produce *nothing*! While there are certain programs that are needed, primarily that of protection, the government has gotten terribly out of hand. It has become a breeding ground for power and wealth; power over the people and wealth (that you and I generate) which they misappropriate into their own pockets.

As we've all hear I'm sure; "our government is the worst in the world except for all of the others".

Private industry creates the jobs and expands the economy. Government takes from production and adds to its power and base. Our economy will never truly recover until and when we downsize the monster that we've allowed to metastasize.

Sounds as if some posters may need to retake Economics 101.

[Bonanza]

It amazes me that only 37 seconds taken out of a speech --
a speech which obviously was much, much longer --
created all these comments, most of which are negative.

I have not been able to find "the rest of the story,"
i.e., the entire speech, which in my mind,
is the only fair way to make any kind of comment.

[l2ridehd]

I found and read the entire speech and it scares the H out of me. How can supposed to be smart people believe in such garbage? Socialism does not work. Fails or on its way to failure everywhere it has been tried.

Private industry and small business create jobs. The only reason business moves jobs off shore is competition. If my competitor does it and I don't than I will fail and go out of business. Unless .... Anyone care to guess?

It's called corporate taxes. We have the highest in the world. Lower those to zero and other countries would be moving their jobs here. Yes some jobs belong off shore for the cheap labor. But we have moved skilled labor offshore to lower corporate tax impact and improve our ability to compete in the global economy.

Even our government who complains about off shore job movement, moved 15,000 highly skilled jobs from the US to Russia when they canceled the shuttle program and moved all NASA maned space flight to Russia.

We need less government, not more. As our government has grown, our ability to improve our way of life and standard of living has declined. And that trend will continue if we don't reverse the growth of government. Our bloated government is the problem, not the solution.

[JudyC]

All this sounds like a subtle political commentary to me. I would hate to see Talk of the Villages become a place for this commentary- there is more than enough vitriol
to go around on other outlets. Keep it about the Villages!

[graciegirl]

I found and read the entire speech and it scares the H out of me. How can supposed to be smart people believe in such garbage? Socialism does not work. Fails or on its way to failure everywhere it has been tried.

Private industry and small business create jobs. The only reason business moves jobs off shore is competition. If my competitor does it and I don't than I will fail and go out of business. Unless .... Anyone care to guess?

It's called corporate taxes. We have the highest in the world. Lower those to zero and other countries would be moving their jobs here. Yes some jobs belong off shore for the cheap labor. But we have moved skilled labor offshore to lower corporate tax impact and improve our ability to compete in the global economy.

Even our government who complains about off shore job movement, moved 15,000 highly skilled jobs from the US to Russia when they canceled the shuttle program and moved all NASA maned space flight to Russia.

We need less government, not more. As our government has grown, our ability to improve our way of life and standard of living has declined. And that trend will continue if we don't reverse the growth of government. Our bloated government is the problem, not the solution.


Once again, you have said it clearly, Chris.

THAT is Economics 101, Sandtrap.

Keep our business IN this country and grant corporations tax relief. It is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. It brings jobs to Americans. How many of us depended on large corporations for their livelihood all of their lives? And ....how many of us feel they took good care of us for the commitment we gave them?

Socialistic government in the United States? Please, not in MY lifetime.

[Sophie11]

Our candy companies went to Brazil, textiles to China and technology to India.

[scottiee]

Demand without that no business of any kind

[CFrance]

Thanks, got it.

Well, the speaker of the quote was absolutely right. Trickle-down economics has been tried and it failed miserably. Corporations that take their profits offshore and outsource their labor overseas are not helping America.

Listen to the entire speech instead of just 13 words and you just might come away with some insight on what was said.

Too many people just listen for a tiny phrase of what was said and try to make that sound like the speaker does not have a clue instead of listening to the entire explanation of what was said.


I agree with this. In fact, I find myself doing the same thing sometimes, from the opposite position. It's something you have to guard against in your own self.

Wasn't a trickle-down economics tax-break given to the wealthy over a decade ago that did not create jobs? It was before 2006, because I remember I was still working and was so disgusted that I gave our tax break to our kids, who were struggling at the time to find decent jobs in their fields.

[TexaninVA]

[/B]

I agree with this. In fact, I find myself doing the same thing sometimes, from the opposite position. It's something you have to guard against in your own self.

Wasn't a trickle-down economics tax-break given to the wealthy over a decade ago that did not create jobs? It was before 2006, because I remember I was still working and was so disgusted that I gave our tax break to our kids, who were struggling at the time to find decent jobs in their fields.

Ok several posters have talked about trickle-down economics. Time for someone to post and define what they really mean by this phrase in terms of policy prescriptives. We've all heard the phrase, but simply replaying the slogan is getting us nowhere.

The basic issue is ...what is the best system and philosophy to grow the economy such that most people benefit. (hint: the outcomes will never be equal but the notion of a rising tide lifting all boats is presumably what we are all desirous of ...)

[CFrance]

Ok several posters have talked about trickle-down economics. Time for someone to post and define what they really mean by this phrase in terms of policy prescriptives. We've all heard the phrase, but simply replaying the slogan is getting us nowhere.

The basic issue is ...what is the best system and philosophy to grow the economy such that most people benefit. (hint: the outcomes will never be equal but the notion of a rising tide lifting all boats is presumably what we are all desirous of ...)
Here is how trickle-down economics was defined to me in 2006 at the time of the tax break (from Wikipedia):

Trickle-down economics" and the "trickle-down theory" are terms in United States politics to refer to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided to businesses and upper income levels will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole.

I was replying to the poster who first mentioned the term, and he/she was stating the fact that what OP quoted was taken out of context. I think that was a fair subject to bring up from the original post.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

There are two ways to grow jobs, the right way and the wrong way. for the last six years the only segment growing has been government. When government grows essential resources are used up to produce nothing while taxpayers burden is increased. Not only is growth and production stopped so is innovation Central planning as seen in the FED (central banks) have yielded Wall Street a 75% return while starving seniors. With all of government's monetary policy they have been unable to life us back to robust GDP despite the fact the recession ended 2009. Government has therefore decided that housing is the key to lifting the economy and has ruled the same irresponsible underwriting practices to secure a mortgage setting us up for a second housing bubble.

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economics

That pretty much sums it up. Except that it's spelled "entrepreneurs".

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Wasn't there another American politician that recently said something, "All you business owners out there, you didn't build your business."

[collie1228]

If we keep electing people who have no real management experience (i.e., U.S. Senators), we'll keep getting people who will bend the rules of economics for their own ideological purposes, and who don't have a clue how to make things happen. Ideology is the worst reason to elect someone president. A pragmatic thinker who has run a large and complex enterprise is the only person I'll vote for for president. That means someone from the business world or a governor. The person who spoke the words quoted in the original posting was an excellent senator representing N.Y, but has no track record of ever managing anything other than her own political empire.

[eweissenbach]

The fact is that demand is what creates jobs. The businesses simply hire people to meet the demand. Demand is largely created by a strong middle class buying goods and services. Corporations and businesses don't "create" jobs for the better good of the country or the citizens, they hire people to do the work that is required to meet the demand. Sprint Corp. just announced layoffs of over 700 employees in the K.C. area - they did not uncreate those jobs because they didn't believe in capitalism, but quite the contrary, they responded to low demand for their services.

[TexaninVA]

The fact is that demand is what creates jobs. The businesses simply hire people to meet the demand. Demand is largely created by a strong middle class buying goods and services. Corporations and businesses don't "create" jobs for the better good of the country or the citizens, they hire people to do the work that is required to meet the demand. Sprint Corp. just announced layoffs of over 700 employees in the K.C. area - they did not uncreate those jobs because they didn't believe in capitalism, but quite the contrary, they responded to low demand for their services.

So, if we follow your logic then here's what happened as but one example .... millions of people woke up one day and created demand for the iPhone, and in fact did that without even knowing what an iPhone was or realizing that they even wanted one. Thus, Steve Jobs and Apple just did some admin and engineering things but certainly don't get any credit for creating jobs. Is that really how you think things work??

[eweissenbach]

So, if we follow your logic then here's what happened as but one example .... millions of people woke up one day and created demand for the iPhone, and in fact did that without even knowing what an iPhone was or realizing that they even wanted one. Thus, Steve Jobs and Apple just did some admin and engineering things but certainly don't get any credit for creating jobs. Is that really how you think things work??

Well that's quite a jump in logic in portraying how I think things work!! Of course innovative products create demand - had the IPhone flopped and demand was not there, jobs would have been cut.

[dillywho]

Maybe "create" was not really the correct word. There is no denying, though, that businesses are the ones who employ the masses. I have never heard of anyone who is homeless for instance, hiring anyone no matter what the demand or lack thereof of products/services. Businesses, large and small, employ the workers, not the other way around.

[Villagesperson]

The fact is that demand is what creates jobs. The businesses simply hire people to meet the demand. Demand is largely created by a strong middle class buying goods and services. Corporations and businesses don't "create" jobs for the better good of the country or the citizens, they hire people to do the work that is required to meet the demand. Sprint Corp. just announced layoffs of over 700 employees in the K.C. area - they did not uncreate those jobs because they didn't believe in capitalism, but quite the contrary, they responded to low demand for their services.

May I ask...who or what creates that demand you speak of that is creating jobs ?

[TheVillageChicken]

May I ask...who or what creates that demand you speak of that is creating jobs ?

Ummmmh....consumers?

[eweissenbach]

May I ask...who or what creates that demand you speak of that is creating jobs ?

Good grief! Demand is created by companies producing products or providing services that the customer needs, wants or craves. It is enhanced by good marketing, but unless the product is exemplary, or in some cases cheaper than the competition, the demand will not be there. The company produces the products or provides services that they are confident will fill the demand. Some succeed, some fail despite their best efforts. Apple did not start with 20,000 employees out of some hope that demand would be there, or some altruistic desire to employ a large number of people.

[eweissenbach]

Two of my three children co-own a Healthcare staffing agency. It is highly successful and the top agency in the Kansas City Missouri area and all of Kansas. They have never created a job! They add employees when it becomes evident that the demand for their services is too great for the current employee base. They currently employ over 300 people, but they had to cut jobs in '07-09, because the economic effect on the facilities they serve caused them to use less staff. They don't add jobs, or cut jobs, for any reason other than to meet the demand on a very good and needed service they provide. Some of the best corporations have had failed initiatives, which caused them to cut jobs or at the least, not add jobs. Ford Motor Company had the worlds best designers, engineers, and marketing people in '58 when they introduced the Edsel. Coca Cola had the best research, chemical engineers, and a huge advertising budget when they introduced New Coke. Even the finest companies don't always win - when they don't jobs are lost, when they do, jobs are added. Consumers decide who wins and who loses.

[kittygilchrist]

I am a a conservative, a business owner, and I enjoy sharing the profit with carefully chosen businesses or individuals who benefit while providing needed services.
I create jobs by supporting other businesses, and we all as homeowners who hire services, create work opportunities.
We are revolutionizing the economy of three counties. Yay for us!

And as a heads up, I recently hired a nightmare dog sitter in my home and learned more about being careful than I wanted to know, so do be careful.

[eweissenbach]

Actually the term "job creators" is a well funded marketing ploy, funded by billionaires to convince middle Americans to join with them philosophically, to keep taxes at historically low rates on the wealthy, to their (middle Americans) ultimate detriment. I can't recall the term "job creators" even used in the vernacular until the last few years. It was created by political marketers and has obviously been quite effective.

[eweissenbach]

I am a a conservative, a business owner, and I enjoy sharing the profit with carefully chosen businesses or individuals who benefit while providing needed services.
I create jobs by supporting other businesses, and we all as homeowners who hire services, create work opportunities.
We are revolutionizing the economy of three counties. Yay for us!

And as a heads up, I recently hired a nightmare dog sitter in my home and learned more about being careful than I wanted to know, so do be careful.

Good for you Kitty, and a perfect example of whence I speak. You "share" your profit with carefully chosen businesses who benefit while providing needed services. You create jobs by being a consumer both as a business and an individual - my point precisely.

[kittygilchrist]

To vilify business owners is just wrong. To create a strata of society that feels they are owed Government subsidy to survive is wrong. To enslave economically challenged humans by disabling them with welfare is wrong. To rob people of an incentive to stand up for themselves and become independent and work hard to make their own way is wrong.
I stand against the creation of A class of people who don't need a job.
I would like to coin a new term:

Indigent Creators

[rubicon]

A couple of days ago there was a thread here on Gasoline Prices. One conservative poster wrote something like, "What happened to Buy American when the price of imported gasoline is less than what the drilling costs are in this country?" That is not an exact quote but very close to her post.

So, the free market system is best in this instance as well?

Hi Sandtrap: Where to start? Depends? first tell me what is American today? Nations are so intertwined owing to the global access to stock markets, methods of manufacturing where something is assembled in country A another portion in country B . Another issue is how these products are labeled. e-merge advertises as built in America but all of its parts are manufactured in China with the assembly here.

Then we have the issue of competitive advantage where it is wiser to purchase from country A because country B simply can't compete.

But the kicker for all of this is how do you get everyone to play on a level laying field?

It certainly may make sense for America to buy foreign oil at a specified time for some future advantage or because the costs are less. These are business people who are trying to maximize profits and what makes sense to you and me may mean a bad business deal for them.

If only it were as simple as buy America. One area I hadn't touched was the effect American unions have on competition.

As a consumer I want utility for my dollar (period)

[kittygilchrist]

Kitty!!!

Hahaha!

[eweissenbach]

Oh Oh, Apple may have to un-create some jobs.


Yahoo Finance
Walmart, Home Depot reject Apple Pay

AXP 86.21 -0.19 (-0.22%) BBBY 65.54 +0.30 (+0.46%)

CVS and Rite Aid have fired the latest salvo in the imminent battle in the mobile pay system. The two chains have already stopped accepting Apple Pay, which was released just a week ago.
• Apple Pay caught in the crossfire as CVS, Rite Aid block the app
• Apple Nay

[rubicon]

Remember pet rocks? Now who do you suppose created a demand;albeit short term for pet rocks? The company that packaged and advertised for them and the more demand they creating the more they packaged and when the fad ended they created another fad. A corporation consists of two essential actors entrepreneurs (the correct spelling is for Doc Boogie's sake) and management.
An entrepreneur is gifted with marketing ideas and may or may not be a good manager and hires people to manage his/her ideas and management creates the taste for the product like with slogans such as "Stay thirsty my friends".

If a corporation succeeds everyone based on a hierarchy advances and widens and grows . Income inequality is a political ploy and is the subject for another thread. I am staying close to the topic as there are other side issues that come into play but we are better served to save them for other threads

[Bonanza]

I found and read the entire speech and it scares the H out of me. How can supposed to be smart people believe in such garbage? Socialism does not work. Fails or on its way to failure everywhere it has been tried.

Private industry and small business create jobs. The only reason business moves jobs off shore is competition. If my competitor does it and I don't than I will fail and go out of business. Unless .... Anyone care to guess?

It's called corporate taxes. We have the highest in the world. Lower those to zero and other countries would be moving their jobs here. Yes some jobs belong off shore for the cheap labor. But we have moved skilled labor offshore to lower corporate tax impact and improve our ability to compete in the global economy.

Even our government who complains about off shore job movement, moved 15,000 highly skilled jobs from the US to Russia when they canceled the shuttle program and moved all NASA maned space flight to Russia.

We need less government, not more. As our government has grown, our ability to improve our way of life and standard of living has declined. And that trend will continue if we don't reverse the growth of government. Our bloated government is the problem, not the solution.

I couldn't find the entire speech.

Please post the site where you found it.

[memason]

Oh Oh, Apple may have to un-create some jobs.


Yahoo Finance
Walmart, Home Depot reject Apple Pay

AXP 86.21 -0.19 (-0.22%) BBBY 65.54 +0.30 (+0.46%)

CVS and Rite Aid have fired the latest salvo in the imminent battle in the mobile pay system. The two chains have already stopped accepting Apple Pay, which was released just a week ago.
• Apple Pay caught in the crossfire as CVS, Rite Aid block the app
• Apple Nay

I believe this harkens back to your comments about companies, while good companies, having less than stellar strategies.

Apple has sold approximately 40 million iPhones in the last month. Those folks wanna use Apple Pay; me included. Therefore, Rite Aid, CVS and others have just thrown 40 million potential customers to the curb.

Walgreens is loving every minute of this! If you read about CurrentC, which is the competing mobile payment scheme [that CVS is promoting], you'll see why they are destined to fail in this endeavor.

One last thing....CVS and others are dependent upon Apple and Google to distribute their apps for their pay system. How long do you think their CurrentC app will remain in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store?

[kittygilchrist]

I believe this harkens back to your comments about companies, while good companies, having less than stellar strategies.

Apple has sold approximately 40 million iPhones in the last month. Those folks wanna use Apple Pay; me included. Therefore, Rite Aid, CVS and others have just thrown 40 million potential customers to the curb.

Walgreens is loving every minute of this! If you read about CurrentC, which is the competing mobile payment scheme [that CVS is promoting], you'll see why they are destined to fail in this endeavor.

One last thing....CVS and others are dependent upon Apple and Google to distribute their apps for their pay system. How long do you think their CurrentC app will remain in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store?

Eissen seems all abt consumer demand...am I hearing you, E.?

[Bruiser1]

There are two ways to grow jobs, the right way and the wrong way. for the last six years the only segment growing has been government. When government grows essential resources are used up to produce nothing while taxpayers burden is increased. Not only is growth and production stopped so is innovation Central planning as seen in the FED (central banks) have yielded Wall Street a 75% return while starving seniors. With all of government's monetary policy they have been unable to life us back to robust GDP despite the fact the recession ended 2009. Government has therefore decided that housing is the key to lifting the economy and has ruled the same irresponsible underwriting practices to secure a mortgage setting us up for a second housing bubble.

The only way out of this mess is to return to market basis activity. This will require government move out of the way (meaning dropping costly and time consuming regulations) and let enterpreneurs thrive.

Now this is not political its simple economicse

The late GREAT John F Kennedy stated " A rising tide lifts all boats"!

:BigApplause:

[TNLAKEPANDA]

I have been back tracking trying to figure out who the heck I have been working for all these years. Now I am totally confused. Who exactly does create jobs?

[TexaninVA]

In reading some of the posts, it occurred to me that some have still not figured out that the question originally raised in this thread about who creates jobs is in effect rhetorical … that is to say it has an obvious answer. Entrepreneurs and business do in fact create jobs. The irony is that’s a byproduct of their primary objective which is to make a profit. But, while one can accurately say demand is needed for sales, or that raw materials are needed to make products, one then has to get wrapped in a pretzel like fashion to deny the obvious about who actually “creates” the jobs. That is what capitalism is all about actually … creating wealth where none existed before, and with jobs as a by product. The rub is, when it does that, income will always be distributed in an unequal manner because talent and motivation is distributed unequally. That’s the part that irks a lot of people and which then gets them to use code words like (evil) billionaires and such which basically plays to the green monster known as envy.

But, lest we get off on a tangent, I offer an unimpeachable source to support my contention about who creates jobs. To wit, the (famous female person) who originally made the comment “…corporations and jobs don’t create jobs” has now admitted that contention was in fact a gaffe.

A news article today says this person has “…mopped up her botched statement from a rally in Massachusetts last week, making it clear she’d misspoken and hadn’t intended to deliver a fresh economic policy message…. the former (position held) had meant to talk about tax breaks for corporations and businesses in that sentence, which led into a line about how trickle-down economics had “failed spectacularly” — a sentiment she has long held. The overall context was clear that she had left words out of a sentence; the comment made little sense without it.”

In sum, while we can argue about “trickle down,” and tax policy and such, it’s pretty hard to convincingly argue against the obvious about who actually creates jobs.

[Xcuse]

If you don't believe in capitalism, free enterprise, and the private sector, then you don't believe in the principles upon which our country was founded.

What happened to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

[eweissenbach]

In reading some of the posts, it occurred to me that some have still not figured out that the question originally raised in this thread about who creates jobs is in effect rhetorical … that is to say it has an obvious answer. Entrepreneurs and business do in fact create jobs. The irony is that’s a byproduct of their primary objective which is to make a profit. But, while one can accurately say demand is needed for sales, or that raw materials are needed to make products, one then has to get wrapped in a pretzel like fashion to deny the obvious about who actually “creates” the jobs. That is what capitalism is all about actually … creating wealth where none existed before, and with jobs as a by product. The rub is, when it does that, income will always be distributed in an unequal manner because talent and motivation is distributed unequally. That’s the part that irks a lot of people and which then gets them to use code words like (evil) billionaires and such which basically plays to the green monster known as envy.

But, lest we get off on a tangent, I offer an unimpeachable source to support my contention about who creates jobs. To wit, the (famous female person) who originally made the comment “…corporations and jobs don’t create jobs” has now admitted that contention was in fact a gaffe.

A news article today says this person has “…mopped up her botched statement from a rally in Massachusetts last week, making it clear she’d misspoken and hadn’t intended to deliver a fresh economic policy message…. the former (position held) had meant to talk about tax breaks for corporations and businesses in that sentence, which led into a line about how trickle-down economics had “failed spectacularly” — a sentiment she has long held. The overall context was clear that she had left words out of a sentence; the comment made little sense without it.”

In sum, while we can argue about “trickle down,” and tax policy and such, it’s pretty hard to convincingly argue against the obvious about who actually creates jobs.

Semantics. Few if any billionaires are evil, but some are looking out for their selfish interests to the detriment of the masses.

[TexaninVA]

Semantics

Denial

[Polar Bear]

If you don't believe in capitalism, free enterprise, and the private sector, then you don't believe in the principles upon which our country was founded.
What happened to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Nothing at all happened to them. The principles described above go hand-in-hand and are inseparable.

[eweissenbach]

Actually the term "job creators" is a well funded marketing ploy, funded by billionaires to convince middle Americans to join with them philosophically, to keep taxes at historically low rates on the wealthy, to their (middle Americans) ultimate detriment. I can't recall the term "job creators" even used in the vernacular until the last few years. It was created by political marketers and has obviously been quite effective.

Denial

It's working.

[tedquick]

Semantics. Few if any billionaires are evil, but some are looking out for their selfish interests to the detriment of the masses.

Perhaps now we are talking about Semantics – how would you define “selfish interests”? In your case, I would define it as recognizing that in order to make a profit I need to create a product or service that is of equal or greater quality than that created by XYZ company and offered at a better (at least perceived) price than the competition. That is what business is about.

“. . . . . . to the detriment of the masses”? If one or millions see value in the above company’s product/service and purchase it and the company makes a profit, how were the “masses” hurt? The company made a profit, the consumer acquired a value but how was that mysterious “masses” that you speak of, harmed?

[eweissenbach]

Perhaps now we are talking about Semantics – how would you define “selfish interests”? In your case, I would define it as recognizing that in order to make a profit I need to create a product or service that is of equal or greater quality than that created by XYZ company and offered at a better (at least perceived) price than the competition. That is what business is about.

“. . . . . . to the detriment of the masses”? If one or millions see value in the above company’s product/service and purchase it and the company makes a profit, how were the “masses” hurt? The company made a profit, the consumer acquired a value but how was that mysterious “masses” that you speak of, harmed?

The selfish interests are in keeping income tax rates at historical lows, and even lowering them further on the top earners, keeping capital gains rates low, and ridding themselves of pesky regulations that force them to protect consumers and the environment. Those are detrimental to most of the rest of us in making our tax burdens higher, increasing the national debt, and losing consumer and environmental protections. Many of these wealthy individuals are spending large sums of money in an often successful attempt to buy elections and politicians. Their money and resulting influence draw their benefactors to champion their issues, which at least some might otherwise not. They also buy huge amounts of airtime in marketing their interests to the masses causing many to falsely believe that those interests coincide with their own. Obviously it has been working for them.

[Polar Bear]

The selfish interests are in keeping income tax rates at historical lows, and even lowering them further on the top earners, keeping capital gains rates low, and ridding themselves of pesky regulations that force them to protect consumers and the environment...


So you're saying that more stringent regulations, higher taxes, and the resulting bigger government are the solutions to economic woes. Hmmmm.

[Sandtrap328]

You know that trickle down economics has been tried and it failed. The idea of cutting taxes to the very wealthy and giving huge tax breaks to huge corporations does not trickle down to the poverty stricken people. It does not create more and more jobs but creates only a super rich class and corporate giants.

When they are asked to pay their fair share of taxes, they take their profits offshore and outsource the jobs to cheap labor markets.

Come on, folks, this practice of huge tax breaks does nothing for the middle class and lower class except to create a huge division.

Economics 101 is available. I passed economics with high marks. Did you?

[Polar Bear]

You know that trickle down economics has been tried and it failed. The idea of cutting taxes to the very wealthy and giving huge tax breaks to huge corporations does not trickle down to the poverty stricken people.

Economics 101 is available. I passed economics with high marks. Did you?

And as we all know, in times of high taxation and elimination of tax breaks, poverty was all but eliminated.

Economics 102...Reality.

[kittygilchrist]

The Peculiar History of Arthurdale - C.J. Maloney - Mises Daily (http://mises.org/daily/2645)

American experiment in socialism..by Eleanor roosevelt

[graciegirl]

You know that trickle down economics has been tried and it failed. The idea of cutting taxes to the very wealthy and giving huge tax breaks to huge corporations does not trickle down to the poverty stricken people. It does not create more and more jobs but creates only a super rich class and corporate giants.

When they are asked to pay their fair share of taxes, they take their profits offshore and outsource the jobs to cheap labor markets.

Come on, folks, this practice of huge tax breaks does nothing for the middle class and lower class except to create a huge division.

Economics 101 is available. I passed economics with high marks. Did you?

If you worked for the government all of your life or were tenured in education, you won't have the same views as people who have worked in business. Economics101 is good, but so is chess, Monopoly, MSP&T and common sense.

Risking your own money and taking on the responsibility of people who work for you is another life and opens up other views.

People who work for corporations and rise through the ranks and are reading this know that success in the private sector is NOT easy and requires long hours and toeing the line in morals and ethics for every corporation I have known. You didn't drink excessively or fool around sexually or you were not promoted or thrown out in the corporations that paid our bills. I am sure that wasn't true of all of them, but that isn't how businesses continue to stay alive.

Big companies are forced to go offshore because they aren't given tax breaks here. They have to stay competitive. I guess the government could make the soap and eliminate Proctor and Gamble but I just feel in my heart they would screw it up.

I don't understand why anyone is anti business and FOR more government controls. I think Capitalism is the best way to run things. JUST about ANYONE who is normal and healthy can become rich if they work hard enough in this country, and I mean HARD enough...and not take off days to take their kids on field trips or stay home because they are sick....they can become very successful...so that people can make fun of them and talk about them as if they were unscrupulous and awful.

It is NOT sinful to be financially successful. All corporations are NOT corrupt.

When you give over ANYTHING to government control, you can expect a higher level of waste and misuse of the money.

[Sandtrap328]

I recently read a book called "Thrive" by Dan Buettner that was enjoyable and extremely interesting.. I would recommend it highly.

The book discusses the "happiest" nations on earth. Denmark is at the very top! It is a country that has an equal tax rate of about 60 percent! The citizens are all given free medical care, free education through college or trade school, extreme low unemployment rate, there is encouragement to find the career you like, and there is a feeling of contentment even with such a high tax rate.

Another place discussed in the book is the city of San Luis Obisbo, CA. Their city planners and our Developer are on the same page on designing a town. Rather amazing to see all the similarities.

The USA was ranked about number 20 on the happiness chart, if I remember correctly. Singapore was ranked higher than the US.

[graciegirl]

I recently read a book called "Thrive" by Dan Buettner that was enjoyable and extremely interesting.. I would recommend it highly.

The book discusses the "happiest" nations on earth. Denmark is at the very top! It is a country that has an equal tax rate of about 60 percent! The citizens are all given free medical care, free education through college or trade school, extreme low unemployment rate, there is encouragement to find the career you like, and there is a feeling of contentment even with such a high tax rate.

Another place discussed in the book is the city of San Luis Obisbo, CA. Their city planners and our Developer are on the same page on designing a town. Rather amazing to see all the similarities.

The USA was ranked about number 20 on the happiness chart, if I remember correctly. Singapore was ranked higher than the US.


Click on NPR... Excerpt from the book Thrive by Dan Buettner.



http://www.npr.org/books/titles/137957999/thrive-finding-happiness-the-blue-zones-way#excerpt

[Polar Bear]

I recently read a book called "Thrive" by Dan Buettner that was enjoyable and extremely interesting.. I would recommend it highly.

The book discusses the "happiest" nations on earth. Denmark is at the very top! It is a country that has an equal tax rate of about 60 percent! The citizens are all given free medical care, free education through college or trade school, extreme low unemployment rate, there is encouragement to find the career you like, and there is a feeling of contentment even with such a high tax rate.

Another place discussed in the book is the city of San Luis Obisbo, CA. Their city planners and our Developer are on the same page on designing a town. Rather amazing to see all the similarities.

The USA was ranked about number 20 on the happiness chart, if I remember correctly. Singapore was ranked higher than the US.

So you're living here...why?

[TexaninVA]

I recently read a book called "Thrive" by Dan Buettner that was enjoyable and extremely interesting.. I would recommend it highly.

The book discusses the "happiest" nations on earth. Denmark is at the very top! It is a country that has an equal tax rate of about 60 percent! The citizens are all given free medical care, free education through college or trade school, extreme low unemployment rate, there is encouragement to find the career you like, and there is a feeling of contentment even with such a high tax rate.

Another place discussed in the book is the city of San Luis Obisbo, CA. Their city planners and our Developer are on the same page on designing a town. Rather amazing to see all the similarities.

The USA was ranked about number 20 on the happiness chart, if I remember correctly. Singapore was ranked higher than the US.

I see the word "free" mentioned several times .... that's the problem. There is no such thing as "free" but social utopians keep trying to achieve that to the detriment of all. Sigh.

[kittygilchrist]

I see the word "free" mentioned several times .... that's the problem. There is no such thing as "free" but social utopians keep trying to achieve that to the detriment of all. Sigh.

Sigh...:agree:
Free, if you do not count as money that all europeans pay 50% or so in taxes, (accdg to my German friend.)

[Sandtrap328]

I see the word "free" mentioned several times .... that's the problem. There is no such thing as "free" but social utopians keep trying to achieve that to the detriment of all. Sigh.

Remember, I said the Danish tax rate is about 60 percent. Denmark is ranked as the happiest nation even with that very high tax rate.

Read that book. It is very interesting.

[rubicon]

The selfish interests are in keeping income tax rates at historical lows, and even lowering them further on the top earners, keeping capital gains rates low, and ridding themselves of pesky regulations that force them to protect consumers and the environment. Those are detrimental to most of the rest of us in making our tax burdens higher, increasing the national debt, and losing consumer and environmental protections. Many of these wealthy individuals are spending large sums of money in an often successful attempt to buy elections and politicians. Their money and resulting influence draw their benefactors to champion their issues, which at least some might otherwise not. They also buy huge amounts of airtime in marketing their interests to the masses causing many to falsely believe that those interests coincide with their own. Obviously it has been working for them.

Ed I am surprised to read the above: Historically economies do better when taxes are low and regulations at a minimum. I believe it is a natural inclination to avoid taxes we all do. In fact I encourage people to do so in every legal mean possible because politicians are irresponsible spenders of our money. Dodd Frank was designed to protect taxpayers supposedly. so what did the gov't just do went right back to the same mortgage guidelines that go us in trouble and not only did they circumvent Dodd Frank they made additional laws that negated what they didn't like about it so that Fed fan could sell mortgages with no don payments, etc. I haven/t gone into detail it would be too much reading in one post. and by the way I support corporation attempts at inversions because it is the only ay to wake up this administration attempt at suffocating business growth

[graciegirl]

Ed I am surprised to read the above: Historically economies do better when taxes are low and regulations at a minimum. I believe it is a natural inclination to avoid taxes we all do. In fact I encourage people to do so in every legal mean possible because politicians are irresponsible spenders of our money. Dodd Frank was designed to protect taxpayers supposedly. so what did the gov't just do went right back to the same mortgage guidelines that go us in trouble and not only did they circumvent Dodd Frank they made additional laws that negated what they didn't like about it so that Fed fan could sell mortgages with no don payments, etc. I haven/t gone into detail it would be too much reading in one post. and by the way I support corporation attempts at inversions because it is the only ay to wake up this administration attempt at suffocating business growth


Rubicon. Great post. Again.

[kittygilchrist]

Rubicon. Great post. Again.

Yeah. He's cool. Why is it the sides of this type argument seem to pit logic against emotion? Sums up our political process in a nutshell IMO.

[TexaninVA]

Yeah. He's cool. Why is it the sides of this type argument seem to pit logic against emotion? Sums up our political process in a nutshell IMO.

I think you've put your finger on it ... that really is the gist. Emotion/feel good vs reason and what actually works in the real world.

[TexaninVA]

Remember, I said the Danish tax rate is about 60 percent. Denmark is ranked as the happiest nation even with that very high tax rate.

Read that book. It is very interesting.

Since you seem to be in favor of "free stuff" for all (presumably non-citizens too).... please give us a list of all the free things you think you and everyone else is entitled to by virtue of having a 98.6 degree body temperature.

We need to know just what it is that we (i.e. the guys who worked, payed taxes and other boring stuff) need to plan for so that we can pay up.

[Buffalo Jim]

I believe that every single candidate for a Federal Office should have to pass a College Level 101 Economics Final and a College Level " Money and Banking " Final in order to qualify to hold such important positions .
What say you ?

[TexaninVA]

I believe that every single candidate for a Federal Office should have to pass a College Level 101 Economics Final and a College Level " Money and Banking " Final in order to qualify to hold such important positions .
What say you ?

Well, I like the thinking behind this idea even thought it would take a constitutional amendment to do it. The level of economic ignorance is pretty scary actually in that a lot of people think they understand it when they truly don't have a clue.

I would also add, as another requirement, at least two years of active military service. I mean, while we're at it ... :)

[JB in TV]

Well, I like the thinking behind this idea even thought it would take a constitutional amendment to do it. The level of economic ignorance is pretty scary actually in that a lot of people think they understand it when they truly don't have a clue.

I would also add, as another requirement, at least two years of active military service. I mean, while we're at it ... :)

And, of course, an official US issued Birth Certificate.

[tedquick]

The selfish interests are in keeping income tax rates at historical lows, and even lowering them further on the top earners, keeping capital gains rates low, and ridding themselves of pesky regulations that force them to protect consumers and the environment. Those are detrimental to most of the rest of us in making our tax burdens higher, increasing the national debt, and losing consumer and environmental protections. Many of these wealthy individuals are spending large sums of money in an often successful attempt to buy elections and politicians. Their money and resulting influence draw their benefactors to champion their issues, which at least some might otherwise not. They also buy huge amounts of airtime in marketing their interests to the masses causing many to falsely believe that those interests coincide with their own. Obviously it has been working for them.

For those of you who have been protesting that the rich don’t pay their fair share, here are some facts from Newsmax, April, 2013:

“Income tax returns showing an adjusted gross income of $250,000 or more account for only about 2 percent of all returns, according to the report, which was published last year and is largely based on figures from 2010.

These filers’ share of all income is 23 percent, but they account for 53 percent of all income taxes paid. Those earning less than $30,000 account for 23 percent of all income, but as a group they receive more back from the IRS than they pay in income taxes.

The top-earning 10 percent of taxpayers pay 70 percent of all income taxes, up from 55 percent in 1985, while the bottom 90 percent pay 29 percent, down from 45 percent in 1985. In fact, the top 1 percent pay more, 37 percent, than the bottom 90 percent.

The percentage of filers who pay no income taxes has soared from 16 percent in 1969 to 41 percent — 58 million filers in 2010. “

Now please explain to all of us on this blog how the rich are not paying their fair share!!

[Sandtrap328]

And, of course, an official US issued Birth Certificate.

EXCELLENT idea!!!

[tedquick]

Ed I am surprised to read the above: Historically economies do better when taxes are low and regulations at a minimum. I believe it is a natural inclination to avoid taxes we all do. In fact I encourage people to do so in every legal mean possible because politicians are irresponsible spenders of our money. Dodd Frank was designed to protect taxpayers supposedly. so what did the gov't just do went right back to the same mortgage guidelines that go us in trouble and not only did they circumvent Dodd Frank they made additional laws that negated what they didn't like about it so that Fed fan could sell mortgages with no don payments, etc. I haven/t gone into detail it would be too much reading in one post. and by the way I support corporation attempts at inversions because it is the only ay to wake up this administration attempt at suffocating business growth

Rubicon, you are right again. Here is another approach to looking at our economy: While there have been a few minor exceptions to this rule, in the past 6 decades Hauser’s Law has shown that the government takes in right at 19% of GDP. That was true when the tax rate was 92% as it was in 1952-1953 and 28% in 1988-1990. So doesn’t it seem to make sense to drop the corporate and personal tax rates, revitalize the economy and increase our GDP?

Which makes more sense, to shoot for 19% of a 20+ trillion dollar economy or be happy with a GDP in 2013 just short of 17 trillion and an estimated 17 trillion plus a little more for 2014? Of course we can continue to limp along and complain about the rich not paying their fair share and stay where we are!

Others on this blog have suggested that there is a difference between decision making based on feelings and decisions based on common sense. Of course, that is indeed my perspective. Our present economy is struggling because the feelers have out voted the thinkers.

[CFrance]

For those of you who have been protesting that the rich don’t pay their fair share, here are some facts from Newsmax, April, 2013:

“Income tax returns showing an adjusted gross income of $250,000 or more account for only about 2 percent of all returns, according to the report, which was published last year and is largely based on figures from 2010.

These filers’ share of all income is 23 percent, but they account for 53 percent of all income taxes paid. Those earning less than $30,000 account for 23 percent of all income, but as a group they receive more back from the IRS than they pay in income taxes.

The top-earning 10 percent of taxpayers pay 70 percent of all income taxes, up from 55 percent in 1985, while the bottom 90 percent pay 29 percent, down from 45 percent in 1985. In fact, the top 1 percent pay more, 37 percent, than the bottom 90 percent.

The percentage of filers who pay no income taxes has soared from 16 percent in 1969 to 41 percent — 58 million filers in 2010. “

Now please explain to all of us on this blog how the rich are not paying their fair share!!
What that says to me is that the rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer, and the middle class is disappearing.

And I agree with Eweissenbach.

[rubicon]

The ideological/populist myth of Robin Hood sells to common people who feel they are entitled. But the fact that either because of the accident of birth, dumb luck like I tripped into my pond and it was filled with this filthy black stuff that actually turned out to keep the flame in my lanterns lit or hard work rich people will always exist and to believe by punishing them you gain is just not reality. What is more realistic and not a populist favorite is the Sheriff of Nottingham. Now who do you see as the "Sheriff" perhaps the IRS raiding villages and continuing ask for tribute so they can use it to their liking. I mean you have the seen (via movies) the exotic banquets the sheriff arranged for his guest well that chicken to the left of the goose use to belong to me:D

[renrod]

“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs”

This statement was recently made by a leading national figure. I have deliberately omitted the name and source of the quote to avoid making it political.

I’m more interested in the philosophical mindset of someone who would actually attempt to make this argument. Not only does it fly recklessly into the face of reality, it seems to reveal the inner collectivist poking its head out.

So the question I have is ... if business and entrepreneurs do not create jobs, who does??

Consumers create jobs. You can build the best ever "mouse trap" and without the consumers you have nothing, except the best mousetrap.

[gomoho]

Consumers create jobs. You can build the best ever "mouse trap" and without the consumers you have nothing, except the best mousetrap.

Actually consumers create demand for products that jobs provide to the market. If demand is great enough more jobs will result; however, the consumer did not create the original job that created the product.

[renrod]

Actually consumers create demand for products that jobs provide to the market. If demand is great enough more jobs will result; however, the consumer did not create the original job that created the product.
Try opening a business with something no one will buy. OH, I forgot you created a job, but it didn't last because there were no consumers to buy the product. Consumers create jobs.

[Polar Bear]

Try opening a business with something no one will buy. OH, I forgot you created a job, but it didn't last because there were no consumers to buy the product. Consumers create jobs.


What could the consumer buy if the job (making the product) had not already been created by an entrepreneur? The answer is NOTHING! You do not create a job by buying something. The possibility of your purchase has allowed a company to create a job based on the anticipation of your purchase. But if you are only a consumer, you have created nothing...most certainly not a job.

Who pays the salary for the job you speak of? If you had created the job, YOU would pay the salary. (And no...paying for a product does NOT equal paying the worker's salary. Please don't try to make that ridiculous argument.)

[tedquick]

What that says to me is that the rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer, and the middle class is disappearing.

And I agree with Eweissenbach.

CFrance, I tend to agree with so much of what you have to say, but on this one you and I will never agree. There have been so many postings on this topic that make perfect sense, but to repeat them would only be an exercise in futility. I'm willing to settle for a simple "let's not agree". :)

[Buffalo Jim]

What could the consumer buy if the job (making the product) had not already been created by an entrepreneur? The answer is NOTHING! You do not create a job by buying something. The possibility of your purchase has allowed a company to create a job based on the anticipation of your purchase. But if you are only a consumer, you have created nothing...most certainly not a job.

Who pays the salary for the job you speak of? If you had created the job, YOU would pay the salary. (And no...paying for a product does NOT equal paying the worker's salary. Please don't try to make that ridiculous argument.)

I should probably just bite my tongue and stay out of this thread but given that I operated at a high level in large banking institutions with numerous responsibilities for over 35 years I can not help myself .
First since about 1970 the far majority of new jobs in the USA have been created by privately held businesses with annual sales up to about $5 Million .
These brave business investors have been battling against tremendously continuously increasing headwinds sent their way by the Federal and various State Governments . As a result of the rapidly increasing regulations over the past decade more and more business owners have been simply gathering and holding onto cash rather than invest in new plant and equipment and adding more employees . Our Nation`s primary job creators are almost universally worn out and beaten down . Especially those who actually manufactured American Made products .
For at least 20 years i ran a private survey of the " mood " of such business owners in a survey area of 5 North East and Atlantic Coast States each quarter .
The goal of our in-house survey was to try to get some insight on the intermediate outlook for business borrowing . I can summarize the collective results with one word . Business owners outlook is " bleak ".
Since about the year 2000 private businesses have been holding onto cash and not reinvesting or expanding their investment in pant and equipment . The cash reserves of these major sources of new jobs has never been this high . Thus their need for Lines of Credit and Term Loans from Commercial Banking Institutions has been at historic lows .
This we find our Nation in economic doldrums and frankly the business outlook numbers and economic health numbers put out by our Federal Institutions has been manipulated to make the numbers appear better than they really are by quietly redefining the criteria used to arrive at the various metrics we are accustomed to seeing which at one time truly reflected the health of our Nation`s economy .
Many will not like what I am trying to convey but I am solid in my data and what I believe it all portends for the future .
Some of you may recall a term which was used post Vietnam to describe what had been a long run of business expansion . The Term was " Stag-flation ". Meaning rampant inflation and a stagnant no growth economy .
Until we make it attractive for our once major US employers to bring back the Trillions of off-shore dollars they have accumulated without any type of onerous taxes we will continue to flounder along .
Frankly in reality there is NO SUCH THING AS Corporate Taxes ----- corporate taxes are passed along to the end user -- the consumer as a component of the retail price for the goods that we purchase .

[TexaninVA]

Try opening a business with something no one will buy. OH, I forgot you created a job, but it didn't last because there were no consumers to buy the product. Consumers create jobs.

I think you are missing the point .... consumers indeed provide the demand, in economics 101 terms, but they don't "create" the jobs. That is precisely what a successful business does. Again, the best and most recent example of that is Steve Jobs, Apple and the iPhone. He literally created the market and the jobs ... and consumers are still "demanding" the products. You simply cannot deny the obvious.

Interestingly enough, the famous female person who originally made the claim that business do not create jobs has since retracted it ...ie because even she recognized to argue this makes no sense. A news article from yesterday says this person has “…mopped up her botched statement from a rally in Massachusetts last week, making it clear she’d misspoken."

[tedquick]

I should probably just bite my tongue and stay out of this thread but given that I operated at a high level in large banking institutions with numerous responsibilities for over 35 years I can not help myself .
First since about 1970 the far majority of new jobs in the USA have been created by privately held businesses with annual sales up to about $5 Million .
These brave business investors have been battling against tremendously continuously increasing headwinds sent their way by the Federal and various State Governments . As a result of the rapidly increasing regulations over the past decade more and more business owners have been simply gathering and holding onto cash rather than invest in new plant and equipment and adding more employees . Our Nation`s primary job creators are almost universally worn out and beaten down . Especially those who actually manufactured American Made products .
For at least 20 years i ran a private survey of the " mood " of such business owners in a survey area of 5 North East and Atlantic Coast States each quarter .
The goal of our in-house survey was to try to get some insight on the intermediate outlook for business borrowing . I can summarize the collective results with one word . Business owners outlook is " bleak ".
Since about the year 2000 private businesses have been holding onto cash and not reinvesting or expanding their investment in pant and equipment . The cash reserves of these major sources of new jobs has never been this high . Thus their need for Lines of Credit and Term Loans from Commercial Banking Institutions has been at historic lows .
This we find our Nation in economic doldrums and frankly the business outlook numbers and economic health numbers put out by our Federal Institutions has been manipulated to make the numbers appear better than they really are by quietly redefining the criteria used to arrive at the various metrics we are accustomed to seeing which at one time truly reflected the health of our Nation`s economy .
Many will not like what I am trying to convey but I am solid in my data and what I believe it all portends for the future .
Some of you may recall a term which was used post Vietnam to describe what had been a long run of business expansion . The Term was " Stag-flation ". Meaning rampant inflation and a stagnant no growth economy .
Until we make it attractive for our once major US employers to bring back the Trillions of off-shore dollars they have accumulated without any type of onerous taxes we will continue to flounder along .
Frankly in reality there is NO SUCH THING AS Corporate Taxes ----- corporate taxes are passed along to the end user -- the consumer as a component of the retail price for the goods that we purchase .

Well said, BJim. And it is so obvious, isn't it?

[Buffalo Jim]

Thanks " tedquick " I have always found it sad that so few people in our once Great Nation as heirs to what has been termed " The Noble Experiment " which is our Constitution have such limited and mostly completely misguided knowledge of how our free economy is constructed to operate .
The Federal Gvt was established to " Provide for the Common Defense " and " Promote the general welfare ". The latter statement meaning to provide a means for open trade between the Sates and with foreign Nations . No more .
If you think about it during the early years of our life the Federal Gvt was not really that large as far back as the JFK administration . Most of the programs and special agencies of FDR`s " New Deal " had ceased operation as we entered WWII .
Post WWII the pent up consumer demand and the huge family formation by returning GIs sent our economy into high gear and with no inflation .
The " Guns and Butter " philosophy of the administration which created the " Great Society Programs " began the incessant growth of the Federal Gvt. to the point that it long ago has taken control away from the States and even our localities . This isn`t how the framers of our Federal Gvt designed it to work . And " guess what " it`s not working . It`s bogged down .
The Federal Gvt was supposed to be " the employer of last resort " . However for many years it has been the primary generator of new jobs .

[kittygilchrist]

Thanks " tedquick " I have always found it sad that so few people in our once Great Nation as heirs to what has been termed " The Noble Experiment " which is our Constitution have such limited and mostly completely misguided knowledge of how our free economy is constructed to operate .
The Federal Gvt was established to " Provide for the Common Defense " and " Promote the general welfare ". The latter statement meaning to provide a means for open trade between the Sates and with foreign Nations . No more .
If you think about it during the early years of our life the Federal Gvt was not really that large as far back as the JFK administration . Most of the programs and special agencies of FDR`s " New Deal " had ceased operation as we entered WWII .
Post WWII the pent up consumer demand and the huge family formation by returning GIs sent our economy into high gear and with no inflation .
The " Guns and Butter " philosophy of the administration which created the " Great Society Programs " began the incessant growth of the Federal Gvt. to the point that it long ago has taken control away from the States and even our localities . This isn`t how the framers of our Federal Gvt designed it to work . And " guess what " it`s not working . It`s bogged down .
The Federal Gvt was supposed to be " the employer of last resort " . However for many years it has been the primary generator of new jobs .

Jim, for your sharp pen articulately substantiating what many of us have tried to say....thanks.

[JB in TV]

Thank you Buffalo Jim.

[B767drvr]

Thanks " tedquick " I have always found it sad that so few people in our once Great Nation as heirs to what has been termed " The Noble Experiment " which is our Constitution have such limited and mostly completely misguided knowledge of how our free economy is constructed to operate .
The Federal Gvt was established to " Provide for the Common Defense " and " Promote the general welfare ". The latter statement meaning to provide a means for open trade between the Sates and with foreign Nations . No more .
If you think about it during the early years of our life the Federal Gvt was not really that large as far back as the JFK administration . Most of the programs and special agencies of FDR`s " New Deal " had ceased operation as we entered WWII .
Post WWII the pent up consumer demand and the huge family formation by returning GIs sent our economy into high gear and with no inflation .
The " Guns and Butter " philosophy of the administration which created the " Great Society Programs " began the incessant growth of the Federal Gvt. to the point that it long ago has taken control away from the States and even our localities . This isn`t how the framers of our Federal Gvt designed it to work . And " guess what " it`s not working . It`s bogged down .
The Federal Gvt was supposed to be " the employer of last resort " . However for many years it has been the primary generator of new jobs .

Fantastic post!

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

[Cisco Kid]

I wish whoever the creator of jobs is would come up here to the midwest and get to work. We could use it.

[tedquick]

Thanks " tedquick " I have always found it sad that so few people in our once Great Nation as heirs to what has been termed " The Noble Experiment " which is our Constitution have such limited and mostly completely misguided knowledge of how our free economy is constructed to operate .
The Federal Gvt was established to " Provide for the Common Defense " and " Promote the general welfare ". The latter statement meaning to provide a means for open trade between the Sates and with foreign Nations . No more .
If you think about it during the early years of our life the Federal Gvt was not really that large as far back as the JFK administration . Most of the programs and special agencies of FDR`s " New Deal " had ceased operation as we entered WWII .
Post WWII the pent up consumer demand and the huge family formation by returning GIs sent our economy into high gear and with no inflation .
The " Guns and Butter " philosophy of the administration which created the " Great Society Programs " began the incessant growth of the Federal Gvt. to the point that it long ago has taken control away from the States and even our localities . This isn`t how the framers of our Federal Gvt designed it to work . And " guess what " it`s not working . It`s bogged down .
The Federal Gvt was supposed to be " the employer of last resort " . However for many years it has been the primary generator of new jobs .

So marvelously well spoken!! Nice work.