CONFIRMED!: Rich People DO Create the Jobs

[daveman]

Businesses bring regulation upon themselves, by not behaving themselves when they aren't regulated.

God are you such a little fucking stooge.

Who regulates and oversees the crooks at Fanny & Freddy, the SEC, the BATF, the FDA, ad nauseum, when they fuck up?

Well we know for sure the Republicans didn't regulate the crooks, and now the crooks are Super PAC's able to influence elections not by reason but by emotion and dollars - lots and lots of dollars. Plutocracy is here now; American style democracy is no more.

Yes, it's terrible; we'll never return to the days when unions were the only organizations allowed to donate to campaigns. You know -- democracy.

Right?

 

[daveman]

...Yes, businesses create jobs. Do rich people create jobs?...

Huh. Somehow I thought it was a given that business owners were 'the rich' and employees were not.

Just about every post on this entire thread is meaningless unless we can say what we mean by 'rich' and 'jobs'. If we say that a 'job' is a BLS defined unit of employment, and we say the 'rich' are those with above Census.gov defined medium income, then we see virtually all jobs created by the rich.

Otherwise we've just got another loony leftist rambling with definitions changing in mid sentence.

I think this Administration has revised "rich" down to anyone making over $50K a year -- except for DNC donors, who have no upper limit and can never be classified as rich.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So we should abandon all food safety regulation because the FDA isn't perfect?

Yes that is often the libertarian position. Then you have 300 million regulators instead of a few liberal bureaucrats in Washington.

 

[daveman]

No they don't you dope, that's the 1% of 1%ers. The 1% start at ~350K and the VAST majority of people in the 350-600 or 700k range are earning that through combined salaries, not cap gains. These are the rich who aren't paying their fair share? 35% isn't enough? Tack on in some cases 10% state and all the sales and local and excise and real estate, you are at 50%. Still not enough right? Never enough.

As long as they have some left, it's not enough.

anyone who has more than most has too much. Doesn't matter if they worked their ass off 75 hrs a week for 20 yrs to get there. If you find yourself earning a high salary, you are now the problem. You are greedy, you are not paying your fair share.

The guy who smoked weed all day long in his 20's, never tried, never worked hard, made horrible life decisions, he is the victim. He needs. He is angry because he doesn't have. He will make you pay. There are soon to be more of them and they will get their revenge. Revenge of the sloths.

The revolution will be televised for the amusement of the non-revolutionaries.

 

[cbirch2]

the solution is certainly government spending.

Yes exactly even after we are $15 trillion in debt from spending the liberal can only propose more spending. Its 100% idiotic.

And lets be honest shall we. Even a tiny child knows that dropping liberal money out of helicopters is not real spending.

How so?

Explain please. If a government borrows $1 million dollars and gives it to a construction company to build roads, thats still real spending. It has to pay it back, but its still real spending that has real effects.

Unless of course your an idiot that thinks liberals drop money from helicopters.

 

[Oddball]

Businesses bring regulation upon themselves, by not behaving themselves when they aren't regulated.

God are you such a little fucking stooge.

Who regulates and oversees the crooks at Fanny & Freddy, the SEC, the BATF, the FDA, ad nauseum, when they fuck up?

So we should abandon all food safety regulation because the FDA isn't perfect?

No, meathead, the job should be devolved to private labs and insurers.

The FDA isn't just not perfect, it's an outright protection racket....But let's not allow such truths to prevent retards like you from bitching about "price gouging" pharm companies.

 

[Oddball]

Businesses bring regulation upon themselves, by not behaving themselves when they aren't regulated.

God are you such a little fucking stooge.

Who regulates and oversees the crooks at Fanny & Freddy, the SEC, the BATF, the FDA, ad nauseum, when they fuck up?

Well we know for sure the Republicans didn't regulate the crooks, and now the crooks are Super PAC's able to influence elections not by reason but by emotion and dollars - lots and lots of dollars. Plutocracy is here now; American style democracy is no more.

Right....Republicans are the only crooks.

BTW, speaking of fucking crooks, why is it your warmonger Senator Frankenstein still in the Senate, after being caught red-handed steering no-bid contracts to her husband's company, hackasaurus rex?

 

[Dragon]

As I've already pointed out, the money and effort required to open a store front, obtain the requisite licenses and tax use permits, jump through the other various and sundry regulatory hoops, and hire the help -all of which has to happen before demand #1 is fulfilled- is expended by the relatively wealthy business operator.

And as I've already pointed out, that's not in dispute nor does it address what I have been saying. That money WILL NOT be expended unless it's believed that demand is sufficient that the products or services to be offered as a result will sell.

While demand may well keep the doors of the business open, the consumers do absolutely none of the hiring, firing or any other aspect of the job creation, at the point where those actions are carried out.

No, they don't themselves DO these things, but they are the REASON why these things are done. Without adequate consumer demand to justify them, these things WON'T be done.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the solution is certainly government spending.

Yes exactly even after we are $15 trillion in debt from spending the liberal can only propose more spending. Its 100% idiotic.

And lets be honest shall we. Even a tiny child knows that dropping liberal money out of helicopters is not real spending.

How so?

Explain please. If a government borrows $1 million dollars and gives it to a construction company to build roads, thats still real spending. It has to pay it back, but its still real spending that has real effects.

Unless of course your an idiot that thinks liberals drop money from helicopters.

Of course liberals are totally irresponsible to want to saddle our kids with more than the $15 trillion debt they have already saddled them with.

Whether liberals drop money from a helicopter or spend money on a road to "stimulate" the economy they are creating a bubble that will burst, like the housing bubble did, and cause a recession while the free market is correcting the liberal mal-investment.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Without adequate consumer demand to justify them, these things WON'T be done.

This is so easy, if the government enables demand, then people don't have to enable it themselves with productive work and the pay check that accompanies productive work.

Government enabled demand is the exact formula for a soviet standard of living. Now you understand why the Soviet Union no longer exists, why American liberals spied for the Soviet union, and why Obama voted to the left of Bernie Sanders.

 

[Truthseeker420]

The bad news in red.

With all the leftloon bitching and moaning about "income inequality", how can throwing regulatory obstacles like this in the way do anything to help the business ventures of the sainted "little guy"?

The only people who create real, sustainable jobs are in private businesses -- if they're unsubsidized.

Some CEOs are upset that people don't appreciate what they do. So they formed a group called the Job Creators Alliance.

Brad Anderson, former CEO of Best Buy, joined because he wants to counter the image of businesspeople as evil. When he was young, Anderson himself thought they were evil. But then he "stumbled into a business career" by going to work in a stereo store.

"I watched what happens in building a business. [My store] the Sound of Music, which became Best Buy, was 11 years [old] before I made a dollar of profit."

In 36 years, he turned that store into a $50 billion company.

Tom Stemberg, founder of Staples, got involved with the Job Creators Alliance because he's annoyed that the government makes a tough job much tougher.

He complains that government mostly creates jobs -- that kill jobs.

"They're creating $300 million worth of jobs in the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau," Stemberg said, "which I don't think is going to do much for productivity in America. We're creating all kinds of jobs trying to live up to Dodd-Frank ... and those jobs don't create much productivity.

Now, Stemberg runs a venture capital business. "I helped create over 100,000 jobs myself," he said. "Pinkberry and City Sports and J. McLaughlin are growing and adding employment."

To do that, he had to overcome hurdles placed in the way by government.

"All that we get is grief and more hoops to jump through and more forms to fill out and more regulations to comply with," complained Stemberg. "Fastest-growing investment segment in venture capitalism: compliance software."

Read more at the Washington Examiner: Job creators fight back | John Stossel | Columnists | Washington Examiner

Ah the poor rich ! they have forms to fill out? and regulations? and all they get is billions in corporate welfare and free ride from taxpayers. poor poor rich!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Businesses bring regulation upon themselves, by not behaving themselves when they aren't regulated.

Jefferson based America on the world's history which showed that the people where good and government was evil. Liberals are 100% opposed because they lack the IQ to understand freedom from monarchial or communist government. Instead, like little children, they imagine government to be magical.


Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -Jefferson

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ah the poor rich ! they have forms to fill out? and regulations? and all they get is billions in corporate welfare and free ride from taxpayers. poor poor rich!

Can you be specific or are you just ranting to cover up that you cant be specific?

Most importantly, the rich are saintly because they got rich through capitalism, i.e., through enormous contributions to our society. Henry Ford, for example, made millions, by making billions in automobiles available to the world's population.

Also, please note that rich guys like Jobs and Gates create the jobs and products that got us from the stone age to here, not the poor janitors at their companies. Stealing and taxing money from them harms us all because they are the ones who know how to use it most productively to create jobs and products.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Ah the poor rich ! they have forms to fill out? and regulations? and all they get is billions in corporate welfare and free ride from taxpayers. poor poor rich!

Can you be specific or are you just ranting to cover up that you cant be specific?

Most importantly, the rich are saintly because they got rich through capitalism, i.e., by enormous contributions to our society. Henry Ford, for example, made millions, for making billions in automobiles available to the world's population.

Also, please note that rich guys like Jobs and Gates create jobs and the products that got us from the stone age to hear, not the poor janitors at their companies. Stealing and taxing money from them harms us all because they are the ones who know how to use it most productively.

First off I deny they are "job creaters" they are more like opportunists,much like a thief. Jobs and Gates do not deserve a free ride off of taxpayers.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

First off I deny they are "job creaters" .

I suppose you are correct, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates didn't create the products or the jobs, the janitors did while they were sweeping up. I just couldn't see until now. Thank you so much!

 

[Truthseeker420]

First off I deny they are "job creaters" .

I suppose you are correct, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates didn't create the products or the jobs, the janitors did while they were sweeping up. I just couldn't see until now. Thank you so much!

Gates and Jobs didn't create a job for him, demand for new technology created those jobs and would have happed with or without Jobs or Gates. And FYI it was goverment funding that led to the internet.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

demand for new technology created those jobs

actually demand for new goods and services is a given constant in nature. It is necessary for survival and requires no more than birth. It is as common and cheap as water or air.

The supply of new goods and services, however, is exactly the opposite. It was 100% non-existent for the first 5 million years despite the huge demand created at birth or upon ones first breath. With the discovery of capitalism or supply side economics 200 years ago a few geniuses have been able to supply 1,000,000 times more than over the previous 1 million years.

Hence our number one objective is to support the few rich genius Republican supply side capitalists who supply the goods and services we so depend on that were never available before..

 

[Oddball]

As I've already pointed out, the money and effort required to open a store front, obtain the requisite licenses and tax use permits, jump through the other various and sundry regulatory hoops, and hire the help -all of which has to happen before demand #1 is fulfilled- is expended by the relatively wealthy business operator.

And as I've already pointed out, that's not in dispute nor does it address what I have been saying. That money WILL NOT be expended unless it's believed that demand is sufficient that the products or services to be offered as a result will sell.

While demand may well keep the doors of the business open, the consumers do absolutely none of the hiring, firing or any other aspect of the job creation, at the point where those actions are carried out.

No, they don't themselves DO these things, but they are the REASON why these things are done. Without adequate consumer demand to justify them, these things WON'T be done.

Oh really?...Who demanded the airplane, telephone or the fucking Frisbee, before their invention?

 

[cbirch2]

Yes exactly even after we are $15 trillion in debt from spending the liberal can only propose more spending. Its 100% idiotic.

And lets be honest shall we. Even a tiny child knows that dropping liberal money out of helicopters is not real spending.

How so?

Explain please. If a government borrows $1 million dollars and gives it to a construction company to build roads, thats still real spending. It has to pay it back, but its still real spending that has real effects.

Unless of course your an idiot that thinks liberals drop money from helicopters.

Of course liberals are totally irresponsible to want to saddle our kids with more than the $15 trillion debt they have already saddled them with.

Whether liberals drop money from a helicopter or spend money on a road to "stimulate" the economy they are creating a bubble that will burst, like the housing bubble did, and cause a recession while the free market is correcting the liberal mal-investment.

"Liberal malinvestment".

Historically the government drives massive technological change in the economy. Im all for cutting pork, but not using the debt, created in every way by republicans, as a reason to destroy the federal government. That is the republican agenda at the moment. Theyll swear all day that the debt is the result of liberal policies, and its just bullshit. Republicans do not, nor have they ever, have any concern for the budget when it isnt politically convenient.

 

[cbirch2]

Without adequate consumer demand to justify them, these things WON'T be done.

This is so easy, if the government enables demand, then people don't have to enable it themselves with productive work and the pay check that accompanies productive work.

Government enabled demand is the exact formula for a soviet standard of living. Now you understand why the Soviet Union no longer exists, why American liberals spied for the Soviet union, and why Obama voted to the left of Bernie Sanders.

You live in a fantasy world. As if the american economy resembles soviet russia in the slightest bit. Thats hyperbole to such a crazy extent.

Bernie Sanders is a great senator. Hes been in congress since 91. What have you done lately?