Who are the job creators?

[Foxfyre]

Economics lesson #38:

1. Customers create demand, not jobs.

2. Employers recognize and accommodate demand and, by doing so, create jobs.

3. If prices are too high, demand evaporates quickly for all but the barest necessities.

4. If taxes, insurance, regulation, mandates, union demands, high wages, zoning restrictions, etc. require a price for a product or service that is higher than people are likely to be willing to pay, the employer will not risk his limited capital to provide the product or service. That results in no product or service being avaiable or it will be imported from some place that can provide it at a marketable price. The consumer will get his/her product but no jobs will be created where the cost to meet the demand is too high.

(Currently the uncertainty re such costs is causing potential employers to sit on trillions of dollars of investment capital both domestically and overseas and is why the economy is stalled. Provide stablility and certainty of tax burden, regulation, mandates etc. in a business friendly way and those employers can again have some realistic expectation of results and they will turn loose of that money and the economy will be booming again.)

To say that consumers create jobs is not much difference that saying dogs create dog biscuits just because they will eat one if it is available.

 

[Jarhead]

So consumers drive the need. If there is a demand, there is little risk. Some sure, but when you know you already have a market, the risk is minimized. So then we agree that is the middle class who are driving force behind job creation. Because without their demand, there would be no need to create a supply.

Black bold...of course.
Red bold.....false. Anytime you expand there is great risk. You may miss the market and lose to the competition. More employees means more chances of injury, law suits, etc...regulations can pop up that kill you.....I can go on...but there is always great risk when you expand
green bold......no.....I agree that the middle class creates demand...but the driving forece behind job creation is the willingness for a business to take a risk.

bear in mind...it is not the business owners RESPONSIBILITY to meet demand. It is his/her CHOICE to meet demand.

He or she can simply stay small...earn his/her nice living and let the competiton pick up the slack.

If a company/business does not feel the risk is worth the reward and there is still a demand for that product or service, then another company will just fill that void and figure out how to benefit from that consumer driven demand. The beauty of a successful capitalistic system.

The driving force behind all of this still remains that consumer demand. Without that, there is no business.

Sure....such is true in times of prosperity.
In times such as these, business owners are not nearly as willing to take the risks.
Then add on to it uncertainty of what new regulations may come up...and they are even less apt to take the risk.

 

[RDD_1210]

Black bold...of course.
Red bold.....false. Anytime you expand there is great risk. You may miss the market and lose to the competition. More employees means more chances of injury, law suits, etc...regulations can pop up that kill you.....I can go on...but there is always great risk when you expand
green bold......no.....I agree that the middle class creates demand...but the driving forece behind job creation is the willingness for a business to take a risk.

bear in mind...it is not the business owners RESPONSIBILITY to meet demand. It is his/her CHOICE to meet demand.

He or she can simply stay small...earn his/her nice living and let the competiton pick up the slack.

If a company/business does not feel the risk is worth the reward and there is still a demand for that product or service, then another company will just fill that void and figure out how to benefit from that consumer driven demand. The beauty of a successful capitalistic system.

The driving force behind all of this still remains that consumer demand. Without that, there is no business.

Sure....such is true in times of prosperity.
In times such as these, business owners are not nearly as willing to take the risks.
Then add on to it uncertainty of what new regulations may come up...and they are even less apt to take the risk.

I agree, times such as now there are less willing to take the risk...because the consumer side is hurting and people aren't spending. If people aren't spending, business can't grow, jobs can't be created. It all boils down to...are people spending.

 

[Intense]

Supply vs. demand.

If the supply side can create all the product that they want free of taxes and regulations it won't matter if there is no demand. If the middle class have no disposable income, the demand slows down.

Now if the middle class are flourishing and have money to spend, the demand becomes obvious and business and in turn jobs will be created to meet that demand.

The real "job creators" are not the rich, but the people who purchase the products. If they have no money, they make no purchases.

So yes, we should be catering to the job creators. It's just a matter of deciding who truly are the job creators that is the question.

False Premise. Where there is need, you will buy, when you can afford. You keep punishing Achievement, and sooner or later you will be wallowing in your own shit.

 

[bripat9643]

Sow cows magically appear when a farmer creates the barn?

The farmer created the cows. He bred them, fed them and then provided housing for them. You actually expect us to believe, in any meaningful sense, that cows deserve credit for the existence of barns? If you walk up to a farmer and ask him who built his barn, do you really believe anyone would say the cows built it?

So farmers (business) saw cows (consumers) living in the open. There was a need for shelter, so the farmer created the barn (product) to match the needs of the cow.

Farmers in cold areas noticed their cows dying in the winter and invented a means of preserving their livestock. Prior to that, the cows simply died or lost a lot of weight and didn't give any milk.

Your analogy only reinforces the point that demand drives business.

No, it reinforces that fact that your theory is just a cheap scam. It's a trick of semantics. It has no economic significance.

The farmer didn't create the barn on a whim and magically cows started appearing out of thin air.

All you've said is that people do things for a reason.

No duh?

The bottom line is that the cows did not create the barn. Only a complete lunatic or a totally shameless propagandist would dispute the fact

 

[RDD_1210]

Supply vs. demand.

If the supply side can create all the product that they want free of taxes and regulations it won't matter if there is no demand. If the middle class have no disposable income, the demand slows down.

Now if the middle class are flourishing and have money to spend, the demand becomes obvious and business and in turn jobs will be created to meet that demand.

The real "job creators" are not the rich, but the people who purchase the products. If they have no money, they make no purchases.

So yes, we should be catering to the job creators. It's just a matter of deciding who truly are the job creators that is the question.

False Premise. Where there is need, you will buy, when you can afford. You keep punishing Achievement, and sooner or later you will be wallowing in your own shit.

Highlighted the important part. If you can't afford, you don't buy. If you don't buy, business growth declines. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Jarhead]

If a company/business does not feel the risk is worth the reward and there is still a demand for that product or service, then another company will just fill that void and figure out how to benefit from that consumer driven demand. The beauty of a successful capitalistic system.

The driving force behind all of this still remains that consumer demand. Without that, there is no business.

Sure....such is true in times of prosperity.
In times such as these, business owners are not nearly as willing to take the risks.
Then add on to it uncertainty of what new regulations may come up...and they are even less apt to take the risk.

I agree, times such as now there are less willing to take the risk...because the consumer side is hurting and people aren't spending. If people aren't spending, business can't grow, jobs can't be created. It all boils down to...are people spending.

They are hiring at a level below the demand.
You will find the wait in a store longer than normal. Not due to increase sales, but due to a decrease in checkout clerks.
Same for lines at a bank, a fast food restaurant...

Companies are reluctant to hire......and not meeting the demand.

We just dont realize it.

In a mall last staurday my wife was lioke "wow...good news....look at how long the line is at Macy's....and it started a whole bunch of people talking about it as we waited on line.

Then there was me....the voice of doom.

All I had to say was the truth...."Look how many registers are closed"

Pretty much shut those cackling women up.

Uh oh...now I'm a dead man.

 

[RDD_1210]

Sow cows magically appear when a farmer creates the barn?

The farmer created the cows. He bred them, fed them and then provided housing for them. You actually expect us to believe, in any meaningful sense, that cows deserve credit for the existence of barns? If you walk up to a farmer and ask him who built his barn, do you really believe anyone would say the cows built it?

So farmers (business) saw cows (consumers) living in the open. There was a need for shelter, so the farmer created the barn (product) to match the needs of the cow.

Farmers in cold areas noticed their cows dying in the winter and invented a means of preserving their livestock. Prior to that, the cows simply died or lost a lot of weight and didn't give any milk.

Your analogy only reinforces the point that demand drives business.

No, it reinforces that fact that your theory is just a cheap scam. It's a trick of semantics. It has no economic significance.

The farmer didn't create the barn on a whim and magically cows started appearing out of thin air.

All you've said is that people do things for a reason.

No duh?

The bottom line is that the cows did not create the barn. Only a complete lunatic or a totally shameless propagandist would dispute the fact

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

 

[RDD_1210]

Sure....such is true in times of prosperity.
In times such as these, business owners are not nearly as willing to take the risks.
Then add on to it uncertainty of what new regulations may come up...and they are even less apt to take the risk.

I agree, times such as now there are less willing to take the risk...because the consumer side is hurting and people aren't spending. If people aren't spending, business can't grow, jobs can't be created. It all boils down to...are people spending.

They are hiring at a level below the demand.
You will find the wait in a store longer than normal. Not due to increase sales, but due to a decrease in checkout clerks.
Same for lines at a bank, a fast food restaurant...

Companies are reluctant to hire......and not meeting the demand.

We just dont realize it.

In a mall last staurday my wife was lioke "wow...good news....look at how long the line is at Macy's....and it started a whole bunch of people talking about it as we waited on line.

Then there was me....the voice of doom.

All I had to say was the truth...."Look how many registers are closed"

Pretty much shut those cackling women up.

Uh oh...now I'm a dead man.

Right, demand is still down overall, so profits are down. The stores can't force demand up to where it was before, but they want to try to maintain profits as best as possible. The next place to go is to cut labor to prop up the bottom line.

Again, all driven by consumer demand. We're agreeing here I think.

 

[Intense]

Supply vs. demand.

If the supply side can create all the product that they want free of taxes and regulations it won't matter if there is no demand. If the middle class have no disposable income, the demand slows down.

Now if the middle class are flourishing and have money to spend, the demand becomes obvious and business and in turn jobs will be created to meet that demand.

The real "job creators" are not the rich, but the people who purchase the products. If they have no money, they make no purchases.

So yes, we should be catering to the job creators. It's just a matter of deciding who truly are the job creators that is the question.

False Premise. Where there is need, you will buy, when you can afford. You keep punishing Achievement, and sooner or later you will be wallowing in your own shit.

Highlighted the important part. If you can't afford, you don't buy. If you don't buy, business growth declines. Thanks for proving my point.

You cannot distinguish between need and want. That's not surprising though. The key here is prioritization. Business growth is declining because of uncertainty brought on by poor Government Administration and overspending. It puts us all in a bind. Misuse of Government Power and Authority over our lives. It all has a cost, a consequence.

Keep trying to Unionize those Cows though. You got something there.

 

[Jarhead]

Sow cows magically appear when a farmer creates the barn?

The farmer created the cows. He bred them, fed them and then provided housing for them. You actually expect us to believe, in any meaningful sense, that cows deserve credit for the existence of barns? If you walk up to a farmer and ask him who built his barn, do you really believe anyone would say the cows built it?



Farmers in cold areas noticed their cows dying in the winter and invented a means of preserving their livestock. Prior to that, the cows simply died or lost a lot of weight and didn't give any milk.



No, it reinforces that fact that your theory is just a cheap scam. It's a trick of semantics. It has no economic significance.

The farmer didn't create the barn on a whim and magically cows started appearing out of thin air.

All you've said is that people do things for a reason.

No duh?

The bottom line is that the cows did not create the barn. Only a complete lunatic or a totally shameless propagandist would dispute the fact

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

yes...but that does not make the cow the barn creater.

 

[Intense]

I agree, times such as now there are less willing to take the risk...because the consumer side is hurting and people aren't spending. If people aren't spending, business can't grow, jobs can't be created. It all boils down to...are people spending.

They are hiring at a level below the demand.
You will find the wait in a store longer than normal. Not due to increase sales, but due to a decrease in checkout clerks.
Same for lines at a bank, a fast food restaurant...

Companies are reluctant to hire......and not meeting the demand.

We just dont realize it.

In a mall last staurday my wife was lioke "wow...good news....look at how long the line is at Macy's....and it started a whole bunch of people talking about it as we waited on line.

Then there was me....the voice of doom.

All I had to say was the truth...."Look how many registers are closed"

Pretty much shut those cackling women up.

Uh oh...now I'm a dead man.

Right, demand is still down overall, so profits are down. The stores can't force demand up to where it was before, but they want to try to maintain profits as best as possible. The next place to go is to cut labor to prop up the bottom line.

Again, all driven by consumer demand. We're agreeing here I think.

You continue to miss the part about Government policy keeping that directional spending purse drained.

 

[RDD_1210]

The farmer created the cows. He bred them, fed them and then provided housing for them. You actually expect us to believe, in any meaningful sense, that cows deserve credit for the existence of barns? If you walk up to a farmer and ask him who built his barn, do you really believe anyone would say the cows built it?



Farmers in cold areas noticed their cows dying in the winter and invented a means of preserving their livestock. Prior to that, the cows simply died or lost a lot of weight and didn't give any milk.



No, it reinforces that fact that your theory is just a cheap scam. It's a trick of semantics. It has no economic significance.



All you've said is that people do things for a reason.

No duh?

The bottom line is that the cows did not create the barn. Only a complete lunatic or a totally shameless propagandist would dispute the fact

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

yes...but that does not make the cow the barn creater.

Not physically, No. And I've already said that. But the cows needs drive the business to be created, because if someone can profit by providing for the cow, then someone will step up and do it. If not this farmer, then another one will.

 

[Jarhead]

I agree, times such as now there are less willing to take the risk...because the consumer side is hurting and people aren't spending. If people aren't spending, business can't grow, jobs can't be created. It all boils down to...are people spending.

They are hiring at a level below the demand.
You will find the wait in a store longer than normal. Not due to increase sales, but due to a decrease in checkout clerks.
Same for lines at a bank, a fast food restaurant...

Companies are reluctant to hire......and not meeting the demand.

We just dont realize it.

In a mall last staurday my wife was lioke "wow...good news....look at how long the line is at Macy's....and it started a whole bunch of people talking about it as we waited on line.

Then there was me....the voice of doom.

All I had to say was the truth...."Look how many registers are closed"

Pretty much shut those cackling women up.

Uh oh...now I'm a dead man.

Right, demand is still down overall, so profits are down. The stores can't force demand up to where it was before, but they want to try to maintain profits as best as possible. The next place to go is to cut labor to prop up the bottom line.

Again, all driven by consumer demand. We're agreeing here I think.

you missed the point.

Retailers are not meeting the demand...they are hiring below the demand and thus have longer lines.

 

[bripat9643]

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

ROFL! You're the one who thinks cows build barns, but I'm the one who's dense?

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

And without rain no one would create umbrellas.

The bottom line is that the cow deserves no credit for the existence of barns, and the consumer deserves no credit for the existence of iPhones. Steve Jobs created the iPhone, not consumers.

You're playing words games here, not enunciating any rational economic theory.

 

[Jarhead]

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

yes...but that does not make the cow the barn creater.

Not physically, No. And I've already said that. But the cows needs drive the business to be created, because if someone can profit by providing for the cow, then someone will step up and do it. If not this farmer, then another one will.

well of course.

No one will make twinkies if no one eats them.
BUT.....if the maker of twinkies only wants to make enough to meet half the demand becuase he has had enough of the headaches of expanding....then there will be less people eating twinkies.

And yes, others may want to meet that demand...but in times like these, even if there is still a demand for twinkies, manufacturers may opt not to expand to meet that demand.

It has happened in the past.

Example.....the makers of Cabbage Patch Dolls did not deem it worthy to expand and make more...so there was a serious shortage....and a great demand....

 

[RDD_1210]

They are hiring at a level below the demand.
You will find the wait in a store longer than normal. Not due to increase sales, but due to a decrease in checkout clerks.
Same for lines at a bank, a fast food restaurant...

Companies are reluctant to hire......and not meeting the demand.

We just dont realize it.

In a mall last staurday my wife was lioke "wow...good news....look at how long the line is at Macy's....and it started a whole bunch of people talking about it as we waited on line.

Then there was me....the voice of doom.

All I had to say was the truth...."Look how many registers are closed"

Pretty much shut those cackling women up.

Uh oh...now I'm a dead man.

Right, demand is still down overall, so profits are down. The stores can't force demand up to where it was before, but they want to try to maintain profits as best as possible. The next place to go is to cut labor to prop up the bottom line.

Again, all driven by consumer demand. We're agreeing here I think.

you missed the point.

Retailers are not meeting the demand...they are hiring below the demand and thus have longer lines.

If those lines continue to be long, the next step will be to hire more people. Retailers could be cautious and aren't hiring because of what could be just blip in demand increase, but if the lines continue to be long, and it's not an anomaly then that all but forces them to hire more people to satisfy that demand.

 

[bripat9643]

yes...but that does not make the cow the barn creater.

Not physically, No. And I've already said that. But the cows needs drive the business to be created, because if someone can profit by providing for the cow, then someone will step up and do it. If not this farmer, then another one will.

Someone could have become very wealthy in the year 1100 AD if they had invented penicillin. Why did "consumers" have to wait another 850 years for the market to meet their "demand" for a cure for infections?

 

[RDD_1210]

You're pretty dense, aren't you? But we already knew that.

ROFL! You're the one who thinks cows build barns, but I'm the one who's dense?

I already said the cows don't physically build the barn, but the needs of the cow is what causes the farmer to create the barn. You keep agreeing with me and providing examples that prove what I am saying. Yet, you want so bad to disprove the theory that demand drives the need for supply.

Yes, the farmer creates the product.
Yes, the farmer hires the employees to make the product.
The cow provides the reason and demand for the farmer to do the above.

Without the cow and its needs, the farmer has no interest in creating a product for something that doesn't exist and is not needed.

And without rain no one would create umbrellas.

The bottom line is that the cow deserves no credit for the existence of barns, and the consumer deserves no credit for the existence of iPhones. Steve Jobs created the iPhone, not consumers.

You're playing words games here, not enunciating any rational economic theory.

So did you decide to switch analogies because your cow theory was only proving my point?

Keep moving the goal posts, it doesn't change anything.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Economics lesson #38:

1. Customers create demand, not jobs.

2. Employers recognize and accommodate demand and, by doing so, create jobs.

3. If prices are too high, demand evaporates quickly for all but the barest necessities.

4. If taxes, insurance, regulation, mandates, union demands, high wages, zoning restrictions, etc. require a price for a product or service that is higher than people are likely to be willing to pay, the employer will not risk his limited capital to provide the product or service. That results in no product or service being avaiable or it will be imported from some place that can provide it at a marketable price. The consumer will get his/her product but no jobs will be created where the cost to meet the demand is too high.

(Currently the uncertainty re such costs is causing potential employers to sit on trillions of dollars of investment capital both domestically and overseas and is why the economy is stalled. Provide stablility and certainty of tax burden, regulation, mandates etc. in a business friendly way and those employers can again have some realistic expectation of results and they will turn loose of that money and the economy will be booming again.)

To say that consumers create jobs is not much difference that saying dogs create dog biscuits just because they will eat one if it is available.

Could you forward this on to the current admin.