Can someone explain why democrats think

[Luddly Neddite]

"the economy grows from the middle class out". I heard numerous democrats say that lately and it doesn't make sense. If your middle class, you are not hiring anyone, and you don't have much discretionary income to stimulate the economy- investment wise.

Can you explain why the 1% does not create jobs?

If you rw's are right, the Bush years should have been a period of enormous growth. Instead, as you well know and cannot deny, we were losing 800,000 jobs a month when Obama was elected.

Since then, thanks to President Obama fighting back against the anti-job pubs/pots, there has been positive growth for the past 27 months.

Starve the middle class out of their homes and jobs and there is no one to buy all that plastic shit the pubs/pots bring from China to put in Wal-Mart.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Say what? You don't have any links or proof?

You seemed so certain.

You said most business owners that hire are middle class. I said that's false. You can't find proof.

Have you ever worked for a business, where the owner was middle class? I haven't.

Absolutely. You are way off base.

I'm middle class and my business hired other people of the middle class.

Does anyone actually believe that all small business owners are wealthy? or even 1%?

If so, you're wrong.

 

[initforme]

If we dont wake up and start paying our employees more so they have more in their pocketbook then we deserve to fail as a nation. If you hire someone, pay them a good wage. If you pay low, you as the owner should have to expect low outcomes from their productivity. If you believe different, you will be short lived. Highly paid workers always have a higher work ethic.

 

[LoneLaugher]

doing what?

In chronological order:


Busing tables
Pumping Gas
Delivering and installing countertops
Landscaping
Painting
Tutoring
Sales

I find it hard to believe that the owners of all those businesses made less than 250, but hey....

We are talking taxable earned income. You are way off base.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Any reflection going on here?

 

[toomuchtime_]

During the Great Depression one could see the shuttered factories, and machines sitting idle. At one time most of the shuttered factories were alive and well. The factories had money behind them, the buildings were there all intact, the machines and workers were there, and then bingo they closed the doors, machines quiet, what had changed? The business couldn't sell their product not because people didn't want their product but because they didn't have the money to buy it. Bingo the businss closed up.
What businessmen would continue making products that no one had the money to buy?

Wrong. Much of American industry was heavily leveraged and when the stock market crash wiped out much of America's investment capital, lenders began to call in other debts to cover their losses. When business owners couldn't cover their loans, they were forced to close their doors and liquidate what assets they could, of course, laying off their workers in the process.

Growing the economy from the middle out is political bullshit. You can have all the demand in the world for your product, but if you can't find investors to give you the money to open a factory and cover your operating expenses, nothing will happen. You can have the best idea for a business in the world, but if you can't find investors who will give you start up capital, nothing will happen.

The difference between Obama and Romney, or more broadly between left and right, is that Obama believes the government should tax away some investment capital and direct to politically and ideologically sound investments, such as windmills or solar panels or electric cars and Romney and others on the right believe that private investors risking their own money are more likely to make investments that will produce economic growth than are politicians and bureaucrats, and most of the world agrees with Romney, which is why so many previously central planned economies such as China and Russia are now allowing private investors to determine where investment capital should go.

 

[initforme]

We need high paying jobs. Low paying jobs should be left unfilled. That is the way capitalism works.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Was there a need/demand for an ipod so Apple made it or did Apple come up with the (wonderful) idea because they knew that when consumers saw it they would want it?

Why is it always argued one or the other (supply OR demand)? They are both part of the cycle; neither can work without the other. Sometimes demand occurs first, sometimes a product is developed without the demand.

 

[AmyNation]

There was demand. Not for the product itself, but for a better way to store music. Products that don't have demand, disappear.

I can't think of any product that wasn't driven by demand.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

We need high paying jobs. Low paying jobs should be left unfilled. That is the way capitalism works.

I don't agree with your premise because its a fact of any society that there are jobs that require very little education or skills.

Although, its not true that there are jobs that require NO skills.

But, as to your assertion that we need high paying jobs, we currently have more than 3 million highly skilled jobs going unfilled because we don't teach/train for high tech jobs.

Leave it to the Rs and we'll be needing a lot more people imported from countries that DO teach/train for today's world - just like they promised the Kochs and Adelson.

If we let the Rs get away with it, they'll teach Americans how to make buggy whips. Or, if Newt gets his way, children will be cleaning toilets and their parents on unemployment.

 

[Zoom-boing]

There was demand. Not for the product itself, but for a better way to store music. Products that don't have demand, disappear.

I can't think of any product that wasn't driven by demand.

Was there a real demand first or did Apple develop the technology because they saw how technology was headed and how it would change the way we store/listen music? They saw the need and behold, the ipod!

Was there a demand for the Pet Rock or did someone come up with the idea and cleverly marketed it as a fad?

To me it seems like sometimes demand happens and business responds but then other times business sees a need and full fills it and then demand for that product happens.

 

[Oddball]

Was there a need/demand for an ipod so Apple made it or did Apple come up with the (wonderful) idea because they knew that when consumers saw it they would want it?

Why is it always argued one or the other (supply OR demand)? They are both part of the cycle; neither can work without the other. Sometimes demand occurs first, sometimes a product is developed without the demand.

Where was the demand for the Frisbee, before Wham-o invented it?

 

[Papageorgio]

Because the middle class does the bulk of the spending and buying.

Without that buying power, who are the producers going to sell to?

wealthy people dont need food, or support the resturants that pop up trying to get that biz? Seriously? I see more poor and middle class using the coupons and staying home compared to teh wealthy guy taking the family out.

Really? How would you know that?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Was there a need/demand for an ipod so Apple made it or did Apple come up with the (wonderful) idea because they knew that when consumers saw it they would want it?

Why is it always argued one or the other (supply OR demand)? They are both part of the cycle; neither can work without the other. Sometimes demand occurs first, sometimes a product is developed without the demand.

I'm sure that Apple believed that if they created the product there would be demand for it, but the demand couldn't have existed by the product did. Lots of times companies run by really smart people believe there is demand for a product but when they make it, they find there is little or no demand for it.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Because the middle class does the bulk of the spending and buying.

Without that buying power, who are the producers going to sell to?

wealthy people dont need food, or support the resturants that pop up trying to get that biz? Seriously? I see more poor and middle class using the coupons and staying home compared to teh wealthy guy taking the family out.

Really? How would you know that?

Poor Tampa businesses... Remember their complaints that the tight-fisted R's didn't spend any money.

The whole point for them is to have enough money to get away from the unwashed masses and, instead of some restaurant with grubby, less than minimum wage wait staff, go spend an evening on a huge yacht, flying a foreign flag and moored out in Tampa Bay.

 

[initforme]

"I don't agree with your premise because its a fact of any society that there are jobs that require very little education or skills. "

I agree but why should those people be paid a pittance? Please explain? You want a janitor? Then pay him/her. A living wage. If you believe differently you see workers as replaceable. That isnt the truth.

 

[Plasmaball]

Without accumulation of capital, who is going to employ anyone to do any buying?

sigh, you people want to make a complex topic into a simple headline.

you need both in order to have a strong economy. You need people who will hire and you need the people to work. You need those people to go and buy said product as well.

If EITHER of those are not present the system will not work. Trickle down doesn't work. Its a give and take balance ( like usual its a BALANCE) that makes this economy run.

Who the fuck is going to roll out the products to buy?...The brokedick with the minimum wage job?

again who are the owners going to get if they don't pay people enough to make said Item, and then have them go out and buy said item?

Again you can't one with out the other. Good luck trying to argue otherwise.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Because the middle class does the bulk of the spending and buying.

Without that buying power, who are the producers going to sell to?

Sorry mot true, but you did show why when tax increases hit, the middle class is who gets hit, because of pure population.

Now for goods, how many middle class people bought hd tvs or cars when they first hit, none because they were too expensive, but after the prices came down and marketing created demand, they started to buy them, its not that difficult to get, but liberals just cant do it

 

[LoneLaugher]

That is ridiculous.

 

[candycorn]

Amazingly enough we have this health system (mine, not the ACA); we did something like 18 different surgical procedures yesterday at one of our campuses. Had we not had a middle class (I prefer to call them middle income) that could pay for these 18 surgeries, my hospital system would not have "accumulated" as much capital as we did with 18 middle income persons having surgeries done.

I swear, sometimes you can't tell a lump of shit from the brain of a typical conservative. I'm sure the company that makes the toasters and automobiles would rather sell 5000 units to middle income, well-to-do, or struggling people than just 200 to the well to do.