Don t Let Anybody Tell You That Businesses Create Jobs

[zeke]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

 

[The Rabbi]

Wrong.
You are responsible for the forms being filed.

If I use a third party that is registered with the IRS, they are.

Wrong.

Employers must complete, file with the Social Security Administration (SSA) and furnish to their employees Form W-2 (PDF), Wage and Tax Statement, showing the wages paid and taxes withheld for the year for each employee. Because Form W-2 is the only document used to transmit information regarding employees' social security and Medicare wages for the year, it is very important to prepare Form W-2 correctly and timely.

Tax Topics - Topic 752 Form W-2 8211 Where When and How to File
Note that employers must do this.

 

[The Rabbi]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

Zeke, you are a raging alky and dumb as shit. But here you have hit the essence: in both cases you cite the potential business must spend money before selling the first product. That is called "investment" in the real world. And investment is what drives growth.
Congrats, buddy. Have a sixer on me.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Ironic post is ironic. No one here bloviates more than you.

Your posts regarding business are consistently naive, simplistic, shallow and ignorant, and they have been so all the way through this thread.

I may as well be talking with a college kid holding up an "Occupy" sign. And for that matter, I may be.

I'm sure many will want to play this farce with you, please play it with them.

And yet neither you or yours can refute them.

When have you been able to put much of an argument on the subject exactly? It would appear the burden of proof has been placed upon you and the fact that your responses have been rather thin on the subject thus far.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ironic post is ironic. No one here bloviates more than you.

Your posts regarding business are consistently naive, simplistic, shallow and ignorant, and they have been so all the way through this thread.

I may as well be talking with a college kid holding up an "Occupy" sign. And for that matter, I may be.

I'm sure many will want to play this farce with you, please play it with them.

And yet neither you or yours can refute them.

When have you been able to put much of an argument on the subject exactly? It would appear the burden of proof has been placed upon you and the fact that your responses have been rather thin on the subject thus far.

That's most generous of you.
A better characterization is that he is bullshitting all the way and getting called out every step of the way.

 

[Mac1958]

Ironic post is ironic. No one here bloviates more than you.

Your posts regarding business are consistently naive, simplistic, shallow and ignorant, and they have been so all the way through this thread.

I may as well be talking with a college kid holding up an "Occupy" sign. And for that matter, I may be.

I'm sure many will want to play this farce with you, please play it with them.

And yet neither you or yours can refute them.

When have you been able to put much of an argument on the subject exactly? It would appear the burden of proof has been placed upon you and the fact that your responses have been rather thin on the subject thus far.

That's most generous of you.
A better characterization is that he is bullshitting all the way and getting called out every step of the way.

Trying to "refute" shallow, simplistic, naive opinion is an exercise in futility.

All they have to say is, "no, you're wrong", and you're locked in a circular hell hole.

.

 

[g5000]

So let's look at more context of Clinton's speech:



"And don't let anybody, don’t let anybody tell you, that, you know, it's corporations and businesses that create jobs. You know, that old theory, trickle-down economics. That has been tried. That has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly. You know, one of the things my husband says, when people say, ‘What did you bring to Washington?’ He says, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic.’ And part of it was, part of it was, he demonstrated why trickle-down should be consigned to the trash bin of history. More tax cuts for the top and for companies that ship jobs overseas while taxpayers and voters are stuck paying the freight just doesn't add up. Now, that kind of thinking might win you an award for outsourcing excellence, but Massachusetts can do better than that. Martha understands it. She knows you have to create jobs from everybody working together and taking the advantages of this great state and putting them to work."




Clinton's staff claims she meant to say "corporation and business tax cuts don't create jobs". The part I bolded further down seems to support that assertion.

This rhetoric is an echo of the 2008 Clinton who said she wanted to "take those profits" from oil companies. In other words, make a special tax just for oil companies and seize their "excess" profits.

Everyone should be very nervous about letting the government decide what is "excess" profits.

The government is already doing this. ObamaCare seizes "excess" health insurance company profits. If a health insurance company makes more money than liberals think they should, it gets confiscated and redistributed.

ObamaCare has already confiscated "excess" profits from insurance companies. It is happening.


So even if Hillary meant corporate tax cuts don't create jobs, it still bodes evil. She intends to seize money from business sectors that liberals hate. Oil, insurance, etc.

They will decide what businesses are good and evil, and will punish the ones they decide are evil, and that kind of capriciousness should scare the shit out of everyone.

 

[zeke]

Zeke, you are a raging alky and dumb as shit. But here you have hit the essence: in both cases you cite the potential business must spend money before selling the first product. That is called "investment" in the real world. And investment is what drives growth.
Congrats, buddy. Have a sixer on me.

Well ole rabbit. The conservative business went bankrupt. The liberal business was successful.
A bankrupt conservative business is good it take it. Cause the owner was so ******* stupid he spent all his money before he had any business.

I would imagine that is why any business you were associated with, failed. You followed those :"conservative" business practices. LMAO

Maybe you should scrape some of that shit out of your eyes and re read what I wrote.
You just made yourself, once again, look like a complete ******* fool.
But at least you are consistent.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

ROFLMNAO! Sweet Mother... THAT is hysterical!

I suppose I will never tire of watching Relativists impart deceitful nonsense as something akin to sound reason.

 

[The Rabbi]

Zeke, you are a raging alky and dumb as shit. But here you have hit the essence: in both cases you cite the potential business must spend money before selling the first product. That is called "investment" in the real world. And investment is what drives growth.
Congrats, buddy. Have a sixer on me.

Well ole rabbit. The conservative business went bankrupt. The liberal business was successful.
A bankrupt conservative business is good it take it. Cause the owner was so ******* stupid he spent all his money before he had any business.

I would imagine that is why any business you were associated with, failed. You followed those :"conservative" business practices. LMAO

Maybe you should scrape some of that shit out of your eyes and re read what I wrote.
You just made yourself, once again, look like a complete ******* fool.
But at least you are consistent.

Thats what I like about you, Zekester. You manage to miss the point over and over and blather your hatred and envy for anyone more successful than you. Which is pretty much everyone.

 

[zeke]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

ROFLMNAO! Sweet Mother... THAT is hysterical!

I suppose I will never tire of watching Relativists impart deceitful nonsense as something akin to sound reason.

Now just what part of the conservative business practices do you disagree with? I have pretty much covered what has been said here.. Even rabbit just posted up how I got the conservative business beliefs correct.
First you spend all your money, then you hope for business then you go bankrupt.


Of course, like you, the rabbit is applauding the failure of the conservative business.
What the **** can you expect from a rabbit and a dude that can't find his damn keys.

 

[zeke]

Zeke, you are a raging alky and dumb as shit. But here you have hit the essence: in both cases you cite the potential business must spend money before selling the first product. That is called "investment" in the real world. And investment is what drives growth.
Congrats, buddy. Have a sixer on me.

Well ole rabbit. The conservative business went bankrupt. The liberal business was successful.
A bankrupt conservative business is good it take it. Cause the owner was so ******* stupid he spent all his money before he had any business.

I would imagine that is why any business you were associated with, failed. You followed those :"conservative" business practices. LMAO

Maybe you should scrape some of that shit out of your eyes and re read what I wrote.
You just made yourself, once again, look like a complete ******* fool.
But at least you are consistent.

Thats what I like about you, Zekester. You manage to miss the point over and over and blather your hatred and envy for anyone more successful than you. Which is pretty much everyone.

Dude, I don't "hate" no successful people. I am successful. Why should I. I don't like you, but you sure as **** are not successful. Never have been (successful) at anything. That's why you are on here about 24/7/365. You have no ******* life.

As to the point. You have NEVER addressed a point in your life. You can't answer a question. You have a hard time writing a coherent sentence. Let alone express a complex thought. You are a ******* joke.

First I thought it was because you are a rabbit. But shit, even rabbits have some common sense.

Go ahead dude. try it again. What was it about the conservative business practice and methods I missed?

Wait, I know. I forgot to have the "BIG GOING OUT OF BUSINESS SALE" that happens right before the bankruptcy filing. Hey at least you gave some lawyers a job. For awhile.
LMAO.

 

[The Rabbi]

Zeke, you are a raging alky and dumb as shit. But here you have hit the essence: in both cases you cite the potential business must spend money before selling the first product. That is called "investment" in the real world. And investment is what drives growth.
Congrats, buddy. Have a sixer on me.

Well ole rabbit. The conservative business went bankrupt. The liberal business was successful.
A bankrupt conservative business is good it take it. Cause the owner was so ******* stupid he spent all his money before he had any business.

I would imagine that is why any business you were associated with, failed. You followed those :"conservative" business practices. LMAO

Maybe you should scrape some of that shit out of your eyes and re read what I wrote.
You just made yourself, once again, look like a complete ******* fool.
But at least you are consistent.

Thats what I like about you, Zekester. You manage to miss the point over and over and blather your hatred and envy for anyone more successful than you. Which is pretty much everyone.

Dude, I don't "hate" no successful people. I am successful. Why should I. I don't like you, but you sure as **** are not successful. Never have been (successful) at anything. That's why you are on here about 24/7/365. You have no ******* life.

As to the point. You have NEVER addressed a point in your life. You can't answer a question. You have a hard time writing a coherent sentence. Let alone express a complex thought. You are a ******* joke.

First I thought it was because you are a rabbit. But shit, even rabbits have some common sense.

Go ahead dude. try it again. What was it about the conservative business practice and methods I missed?

Wait, I know. I forgot to have the "BIG GOING OUT OF BUSINESS SALE" that happens right before the bankruptcy filing. Hey at least you gave some lawyers a job. For awhile.
LMAO.

Zeke, I guess we just measure success differently. But if trailer living collecting gummint checks and getting stoned on Blatz every day is your thing, go for it.
Meanwhile you missed the point that before the first product is sold a lot of money gets spent, money that creates jobs.

 

[Mathbud1]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

It seems like the liberal point of view is actually more like:

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Sit and wait for "demand" to create some jobs for you to fill.
Continue waiting for "demand" to create some jobs for you to fill.
...
Wait some more...
...
Still waiting?

Sound about right? Business owners only recognize that jobs have been created by demand and hire to fill them right? They aren't involved in the job creation process at all right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Maybe I have misunderstood the conservative POV in this discussion.

Seems like the cons. position towards how jobs are created is the following;

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend your capital (borrowed or personal) for business site, equipment, inventory.
Hire employees (jobs created)
Open business
Try and find out if anyone will buy what you do or have.
Take great risk..
Pray customers come in. Or an order of some sort.
***** at employees for "standing around doing nothing", Cause there's no business.
File bankruptcy.

And you all think that's "conservative" and job creating.

Liberals.

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Spend modest money to study the market to determine demand for idea, product, service.
Spend modest money marketing and advertising idea, product or service,
Sell your idea, product or service to a customer.
Move out of house/garage into larger space.
Buy or manufacture inventory.
Hire an employee
Sell sell sell
Hire another employee as demand grows beyond ability to meet demand.
Sell sell sell
Hire another
Make more money, buy more inventory, larger space.
Grow business.
Make more money
Give everybody a bonus.


And that's how liberals go about successful business and job creation.
So people can keep the job.
Maybe a liberal business can hire the employee that lost their job at the conservative business that failed.

But who would you rather work for; a liberal or a conservative?

It seems like the liberal point of view is actually more like:

Have an idea, product or service to sell.
Sit and wait for "demand" to create some jobs for you to fill.
Continue waiting for "demand" to create some jobs for you to fill.
...
Wait some more...
...
Still waiting?

Sound about right? Business owners only recognize that jobs have been created by demand and hire to fill them right? They aren't involved in the job creation process at all right?

It's actually more like:
Step 1: Think up some groovy product that will save the planet.
Step 2: Get other liberal groups to invest money to show they care.
Step 3: No sales
Step 4: Lobby government to make purchasing the product mandatory. Accuse others of not caring sufficiently if they oppose it/ Make sure its for the children.

 

[zeke]

Sound about right? Business owners only recognize that jobs have been created by demand and hire to fill them right? They aren't involved in the job creation process at all right?

Does what sound "about right"?


If you want to create you own version of the liberal vs conservative business cycle, have at it.
Like the rabbit did. OK with me. Hopefully, yours will make more sense than the rabbits.
I was just trying to condense what I have read here as to how conservatives approach business planning. And why those businesses fail following those conservative practices.

But I am in doubt as to whether or not you can make any more sense than the rabbit.
For instance, the above. Are you asking two questions? Or making a statement followed by a question (as it reads)
But I'll take a shot at it.

If a business owner hires someone because of increased demand, then the business owner knew that he hired someone to fill a job because of increased demand.
Hope that helps. But you shoulda known that.

 

[zeke]

Next for Republicans benefit (esp Rabbit, IW and wursdemkeys) we will explore why it is that companies lay people off.

I contend that the companies of America lay off workers when the demand for the companies goods and/or services falls to a point where the company can no longer keep the current work force productive.

That means the demand has fallen. To many workers for the need.

And of course the reverse is that when demand picks back up, these jobs will exist again. Call backs to work based on increased demand.


So you Repubs. Lets hear your version of WHY business's lay off workers. Under your fantasy, they would have just kept them on, spent some more money on capital improvements. made some more inventory and no lay offs. Till the company folds.

Hell I bet you guys would just hire some more workers instead of laying off.

But I am sure you all have a better explanation than that? Right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Next for Republicans benefit (esp Rabbit, IW and wursdemkeys) we will explore why it is that companies lay people off.

I contend that the companies of America lay off workers when the demand for the companies goods and/or services falls to a point where the company can no longer keep the current work force productive.

That means the demand has fallen. To many workers for the need.

And of course the reverse is that when demand picks back up, these jobs will exist again. Call backs to work based on increased demand.


So you Repubs. Lets hear your version of WHY business's lay off workers. Under your fantasy, they would have just kept them on, spent some more money on capital improvements. made some more inventory and no lay offs. Till the company folds.

Hell I bet you guys would just hire some more workers instead of laying off.

But I am sure you all have a better explanation than that? Right?

Well, Zeke that may have been why they laid your ass off. Or showing up drunk on hte job. But in real life businesses lay off for all sorts of reasons. Increased productivity through mechanization has been the biggest job killer.

 

[zeke]

But in real life businesses lay off for all sorts of reasons. Increased productivity through mechanization has been the biggest job killer.

Rabbit, I gotta give that one to you. Business's do lay off human workers because a machine fills the workers role.
Still doesn't change the fact that the demand for the goods or services is now being filled by a machine. And rabbit, you know what happens when the demand for what ever the machine produces falls?
The machine gets turned off. Taken off line, slowed down. Kinda like a lay off but you don't have to pay UE.

Of course the entire thread has been about creating jobs for humans. But I did ask.
So you indicated that you knew of "all sorts of reasons" for lay offs. Go ahead. Elaborate.

 

[zeke]

And isn't that why big companies like mechanization? When the demand increases, you don't have to hire any one. You just run the machine harder. Longer. Faster. Buy another machine.

Look how increased demand created all those jobs to build those machines, service those machines, sell those machines. Amazing what demand will do.