CONFIRMED!: Rich People DO Create the Jobs

[Dragon]

Well, I wasn't presenting Krugman's arguments (which were on a different subject than this thread), I was only presenting his facts. There it is: we have a capital glut, partly due to increased savings, but mainly due to a steep drop in consumer demand which results in low investment.

Now, it's certainly true that Krugman is a liberal economist, but facts are facts. And there are the facts. If you want to dispute them, you need to provide data to show that we don't actually have a capital glut. Go ahead, whenever you're ready.

 

[Oddball]

Once again, Krugman prove himself to be the shameless socialist/progressive propagandist and pom-pom girl he is.

We have a capital glut because federal regulators and inspectors have microscopes up the asses of every lender in the nation.....If businesses on the margins can't get capital to produce, it's only the wealthier ones, with cash reserves on hand, who can do any producing.

 

[Dragon]

We have a capital glut because federal regulators and inspectors have microscopes up the asses of every lender in the nation.....If businesses on the margins can't get capital to produce, it's only the wealthier ones, with cash reserves on hand, who can do any producing.

We didn't have a capital glut before the recession began. Are you saying that regulations have increased so dramatically since then that this accounts for the dramatic change? Is there any good reason to believe that, as opposed to the obvious cause -- the recession itself?

As for big business being the ones who are hiring, I checked that and found the following:

Jobs Locator: A Breakdown of Who Is Hiring and Where - ABC News

Turns out there was more hiring in industries dominated by small businesses than by big ones. So there's no support for what you're saying here.

 

[Oddball]

What, have you been living under a rock?...Haven't heard of Dodd-Frank?

Congressman Don Manzullo (R-IL) today urged federal bank regulators to remove roadblocks that are preventing Illinois banks from making loans to credit-worthy business owners and homebuyers and delaying America’s economic recovery.

Manzullo, a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee, joined his colleagues this morning at a Congressional field hearing in Chicago entitled, “Regulatory Reform: Examining How New Regulations are Impacting Financial Institutions, Small Businesses and Consumers in Illinois.” After making his opening statement, Manzullo heard from several representatives of Illinois’ banking, small business, and housing industries who spoke of difficulties securing the credit they need to expand and put Americans back to work.

Manzullo: Overzealous Federal Regulators are Stifling Bank Loans to Credit-Worthy Americans | Representative Don Manzullo

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDeJVJef7Uw]Manzullo: Federal Regulators are Stifling Bank Loans to Credit-Worthy Americans - YouTube[/ame]

More Willing To Lend, Banks Are Stifled By Regulators - Seeking Alpha

The decrease in total lending is primarily a result of two key factors: 1) pressure from government regulators to increase capital, reduce troubled loans and other real estate owned, and reduce concentrations of construction and land development in bank loan portfolios; and 2) fewer qualified borrowers willing to take on additional risk during a time of economic uncertainty and declining real-estate values.

Utah Business | Articles

 

[Dragon]

Well, we KNOW that a steep recession will produce the effect we're seeing. And we also KNOW that we had a steep recession at exactly the right time to cause the effect. Is there really any need to go looking for another cause?

As for Dodd-Frank, the burden it imposes on the financial industry is small and in no way accounts for the lack of lending. Or at least, I've never seen a plausible argument for how it could do so, especially given that much stricter regulation in the past didn't have that effect.

 

[Oddball]

Oh, bullshit.

Stricter regulations always -as in always- lead to less activity in the given industry, as a matter of course....It's axiomatic: Subsidize something, you get more of it, tax and regulate the hell out of something and you get less of it.

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh, bullshit.

Stricter regulations always -as in always- lead to less activity in the given industry, as a matter of course....It's axiomatic: Subsidize something, you get more of it, tax and regulate the hell out of something and you get less of it.

That dead horse has already come out of many canine rectum AND been use in Missuz Johnson's pre school class art project.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As for Dodd-Frank, the burden it imposes on the financial industry is small and in no way accounts for the lack of lending. Or at least, I've never seen a plausible argument for how it could do so, especially given that much stricter regulation in the past didn't have that effect.

Notable Witness Quotes:
Mr. Greg Ohlendorf, President and CEO, First Community Bank and Trust, Beecher, IL said, “The stakes were raised sharply after the financial crisis, but I believe many examiners have overreacted and now the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of over-regulation.”

Ohlendorf continued, “Many community banks complain that the required capital level goalpost is unpredictable and regulators simply keep moving it further, making it nearly impossible to satisfy capital demands in a difficult economy and capital market place. As a result, bankers are forced to pull in their horns and pass up sound loan opportunities in order to preserve capital. This is not helpful for their communities and for overall economic growth.”

Mr. Mark Sekula, Executive Vice President, Chief Lending Officer, Randolph-Brooks Federal Credit Union, San Antonio, TX, said, “With a slew of new regulation emerging from the Dodd-Frank Act, such relief from unnecessary or outdated regulation is needed now more than ever by credit unions. Further, while we acknowledge that taken on its own, Section 1071 is a well-intentioned provision, when added with other laws and regulations, this new compliance burden is just another drop in the new and growing overall cost of compliance bucket emerging for credit unions from Dodd-Frank.”

Mr. Thomas Boyle, Vice Chairman, State Bank of Countryside, LaGrange, IL said, “We strongly believe that our communities cannot reach their full potential without the local presence of a bank – a bank that understands the financial and credit needs of its citizens, business, and government. However, I am deeply concerned that this model will collapse under the massive weight of new rules and regulations.”

Boyle continued, “Banks are working every day to make credit and financial services available. Those efforts, however, are made more difficult by regulatory costs and second-guessing by bank examiners. Combined with the hundreds of new regulations expected from the Dodd-Frank Act, these pressures are slowly but surely strangling traditional community banks, handicapping our ability to meet the credit needs of our communities. The consequences are real. Costs are rising, access to capital is limited, and revenue sources have been severely cut. It means that fewer loans get made. It means a weaker economy. It means slower job growth.”

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Capitalism is not a system in which people pay their workers as much as they can. Labor is just another commodity,

exactly and commodites sell to the higest bidder. So the highest bidder gets the best workers. Ever notice how commodities go up and down daily based on supply and demand? Econ 101. Sorry! If not why not pay workers 10 cents an hour? Ever wonder why Derek Jeter makes so much?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Here's some more data on why the rich are not the ones we need to pamper in order to create jobs:

Right!! It was the poor and the Girl Scouts that created the jobs 92% of Americans now hold that enabled 44 million of us to fly in airplanes this holiday season.

I heard a famous venture capitalist say the other day that the less he is taxed the more shots on goal he can afford to take!! Is that really over your head?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yea obama was openly for single payer in 2007, as were many people. Many of them still are.

exactly, liberalism is a step on the road to communism. Thats why liberals always want bigger and bigger government even after 200 years of constant growth! You're being used but lack the IQ to know it.

Norman Thomas quotes:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In the conservative mind socialist=nazi. lol.

Actually the Nazis were National Socialists. Keep in mind that Jefferson made no distinction among liberal governments when he created America regardless of the rational they used for seizing power from the people. Jefferson gave us freedom from all liberal governments because government had been the source of evil in human history. He knew that without seeing the great 20th Century liberals: Hitler, Stalin (our liberals spied for him) and Mao. You still don't know it even after seeing the 20th Century. You'd be one of those brainwashed fools crying because your Dear Leader has passed away.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You realize that most of our "socialist" healthcare institutions perform better than their free market counterparts, right? Opponents of Medicare argued for a free market alternative so that capitalism could bid down prices. How do prices for Medicare and Medicare advantage compare?

So that proves competition bids up prices? Who knew! Please state for the record that your intelligence leads you to conclude that competition actually leads to higher prices rather than lower prices. Thank you, liberal!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Your view of the world is massively deranged.

and you say that because your "Dear Leader" told you that competition(Medicare Advantage) leads to higher rather than lower prices, while I insist your "Dear Leader is 100% mistaken and you are perfectly brainwashed?

 

[daveman]

Lol and this is why i say your arguing against your imagination. Hilarious.

And this stimulus bs is hilarious too. CBO says it saved 2 million jobs. To say it did nothing you would have to have something to compare it to. You realize you dont have any stats about what it would have been, right?

Another leftist ignorant about how the CBO works.

They do analysis, but they don't generate their own data. They use data given to them by those who request the analyses.

The deck is stacked from the beginning. The White House has no interest in providing data that might show it in anything less than a flattering light.

You've been played. Pure and simple.

You realize that unemployment was over 8% when the stimulus was signed, right? So your little quote about unemployment going over 8% is pointless. its said in like 2008 where estimates are being made on projections of projections of incomplete data.

Stimulus stopped the exodus from the jobs market.

I made no comment about any 8%. Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence that Obama would raise the top tax bracket to 39% and leave it there.

He wouldn't. Guaranteed. Because it wouldn't be enough. Guaranteed.

What? Idk if your logic is quite right there.

I need to provide proof for everything that someone wont do? Right right, you should just assume the worst about Obama until someone proves you otherwise...

I think were getting at the root of your psychological problem here. This is good.

Ahhh, so you're an internet psychologist.

Funny how your every diagnosis seems to be, "If you disagree with me, you're crazy!"

Meanwhile, back in the real world, my concern about Obama is well-founded. He said he needed a trillion dollars to fix the economy. Now that it's painfully obvious it didn't work, he wants MORE money to fix the economy.

It's no stretch to imagine that the 39% top tax rate wouldn't be enough, and he'd want more.

Because if there's anything leftists are addicted to, it's other people's money.

 

[daveman]

You really have no concept of the scale of the numbers involved.

Not only do I understand the numbers involved, but I also understand the economic concepts involved, which apparently you do not. Much of the current deficit is due to the fact that we have still not fully recovered from the recession of 2008-9. When we do fully recover from that recession, our deficit (assuming nothing else changes) will be at Bush levels, not Obama levels. So we don't have to close the entire gap we see right now; much of that will close of its own accord even if we do nothing.

All that's left is to close the Bush deficit. Let the Bush tax cuts expire (the ones on everyone, not just the top bracket), end the wars (one down, one to go), trim military spending to pay for Medicare prescription drugs, and voila! Back to Clinton-era balanced budget.

If you understand the numbers and concepts involved, why did you not refute the numbers I provided? Merely saying they're wrong may work in the leftist echo chambers, but normal people require more than that.

We'll just go ahead and assume you really have no understanding.

 

[daveman]

Well, we KNOW that a steep recession will produce the effect we're seeing. And we also KNOW that we had a steep recession at exactly the right time to cause the effect. Is there really any need to go looking for another cause?

As for Dodd-Frank, the burden it imposes on the financial industry is small and in no way accounts for the lack of lending. Or at least, I've never seen a plausible argument for how it could do so, especially given that much stricter regulation in the past didn't have that effect.

Well, the problem with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant -- it's that they know so much that isn't so.

-- Ronald Reagan

You sound like an AGW proponent, desperately altering data to fit the model.

 

[Foxfyre]

In the conservative mind socialist=nazi. lol.

Actually the Nazis were National Socialists. Keep in mind that Jefferson made no distinction among liberal governments when he created America regardless of the rational they used for seizing power from the people. Jefferson gave us freedom from all liberal governments because government had been the source of evil in human history. He knew that without seeing the great 20th Century liberals: Hitler, Stalin (our liberals spied for him) and Mao. You still don't know it even after seeing the 20th Century. You'd be one of those brainwashed fools crying because your Dear Leader has passed away.

I don't imagine the Founders were thinking in terms of 'liberal' or 'conservative' and probably the terms 'communism' and 'socialism' hadn't even been coined yet. At the time the Declaration of Independence was adopted in America, there was no such thing as a government other than despotic, monarchy, feudal kingdom, or other totalitarian system. In all cases, it was the government that dictated what rights the people would or would not have.

America under the U.S. Constitution was the first government the world had ever known in which the government was charged to secure the unalienable rights of the people and then leave them alone to govern themselves in whatever way they saw fit. It was a great experiment that was successful beyond even the Founders' wildest imaginations. It produced the most free, most innovative, most creative, most inventive, most prosperous nation the world had ever known or has ever known since.

It is unfortunate that for the last 100 years, we have allowed the socialists and Marxists to chip away at the fundamental concepts of a people who are not governed but rather govern themselves. And we are slowly reverting to the monarchal and/or totalitarian systems that the Founders intended that we should be liberated from.

The assault on the "rich", i.e. job creators, via punative tax systems and oppressive regulation is just one of many ways in which the anti-freedom forces would wrest power from the people and return it to the central government which they see is the rightful dispensor of our rights.

Alas, I fear they have no idea what they do, or how much they will hate their handiwork should they succeed.

 

[daveman]

In the conservative mind socialist=nazi. lol.

Actually the Nazis were National Socialists. Keep in mind that Jefferson made no distinction among liberal governments when he created America regardless of the rational they used for seizing power from the people. Jefferson gave us freedom from all liberal governments because government had been the source of evil in human history. He knew that without seeing the great 20th Century liberals: Hitler, Stalin (our liberals spied for him) and Mao. You still don't know it even after seeing the 20th Century. You'd be one of those brainwashed fools crying because your Dear Leader has passed away.

I don't imagine the Founders were thinking in terms of 'liberal' or 'conservative' and probably the terms 'communism' and 'socialism' hadn't even been coined yet. At the time the Declaration of Independence was adopted in America, there was no such thing as a government other than despotic, monarchy, feudal kingdom, or other totalitarian system. In all cases, it was the government that dictated what rights the people would or would not have.

America under the U.S. Constitution was the first government the world had ever known in which the government was charged to secure the unalienable rights of the people and then leave them alone to govern themselves in whatever way they saw fit. It was a great experiment that was successful beyond even the Founders' wildest imaginations. It produced the most free, most innovative, most creative, most inventive, most prosperous nation the world had ever known or has ever known since.

It is unfortunate that for the last 100 years, we have allowed the socialists and Marxists to chip away at the fundamental concepts of a people who are not governed but rather govern themselves. And we are slowly reverting to the monarchal and/or totalitarian systems that the Founders intended that we should be liberated from.

The assault on the "rich", i.e. job creators, via punative tax systems and oppressive regulation is just one of many ways in which the anti-freedom forces would wrest power from the people and return it to the central government which they see is the rightful dispensor of our rights.

Alas, I fear they have no idea what they do, or how much they will hate their handiwork should they succeed.

No, no...every single one of them will be living in the big house and dictating to the proles. They're smarter than us, see. We can't live our lives without them making decisions for us.

No, really. Just ask 'em.


Actually, they'll be put up against the wall as soon as their useful idiocy is no longer useful.

 

[cbirch2]

So havent read anything since the idiot pirate disavowed very idea of investments and savings, but i assume its mostly just morons ignoring textbook econ because it came from a liberal.

Your home depot after a natural disaster analogy is hilariously pointless, besides being blatantly flawed. Apparently numbers mean absolutely nothing. And apparently when those numbers are textbook statistics given right to you (investment/savings), you can just ignore them because you dont understand the basic model.

Hilarious.

A shift deep into savings from investment is a decrease in demand (because people are saving money...). If a business doesnt have enough demand it has to lay off workers, cut production, cut inventory, etc, etc.

basic....econ.....