Don t Let Anybody Tell You That Businesses Create Jobs

[RKMBrown]

Yes it is. If they use an oligopoly to give themselves MASSIVE pay... at the expense of the consumer and investors... our government is supposed to be breaking up said monopolies. You can't have a free market if you allow a monopoly to control that market.

The concept "oligopoly" is a liberal myth. All it means is that some businesses have a bigger market share than others . In other words, it means capitalism functioning exactly as it should, but the commie professors wants to make it sound sinister.

ROFL ROFL

In other words, you're a dupe who falls for the liberal hocus-pocus.

Oh I thought you were kidding. You really believe monopolies and oligopolies are hocus-pocus? Dude, fess up are you on MJ today?

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

 

[The Rabbi]

The concept "oligopoly" is a liberal myth. All it means is that some businesses have a bigger market share than others . In other words, it means capitalism functioning exactly as it should, but the commie professors wants to make it sound sinister.

ROFL ROFL

In other words, you're a dupe who falls for the liberal hocus-pocus.

Oh I thought you were kidding. You really believe monopolies and oligopolies are hocus-pocus? Dude, fess up are you on MJ today?

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

 

[RKMBrown]

ROFL ROFL

In other words, you're a dupe who falls for the liberal hocus-pocus.

Oh I thought you were kidding. You really believe monopolies and oligopolies are hocus-pocus? Dude, fess up are you on MJ today?

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

 

[The Rabbi]

In other words, you're a dupe who falls for the liberal hocus-pocus.

Oh I thought you were kidding. You really believe monopolies and oligopolies are hocus-pocus? Dude, fess up are you on MJ today?

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

 

[RKMBrown]

Oh I thought you were kidding. You really believe monopolies and oligopolies are hocus-pocus? Dude, fess up are you on MJ today?

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

Just because you don't know what an oligopoly is, does not mean a cartel isn't an example of one.

Websters Definition of OLIGOPOLY

: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

oligopoly noun (Concise Encyclopedia) Market situation in which producers are so few that the actions of each of them have an impact on price and on competitors. Each producer must consider the effect of a price change on the others. A cut in price by one may lead to an equal reduction by the others, with the result that each firm will retain about the same share of the market as before but with a lower profit margin. Competition in oligopolistic industries thus tends to manifest itself in nonprice forms such as advertising and product differentiation. Oligopolies in the U.S. include the steel, aluminum, and automobile industries. See also cartel,monopoly.

Websters definition of Cartel:

Organization of a few independent producers for the purpose of improving the profitability of the firms involved (see oligopoly). This usually involves some restriction of output, control of price, and allocation of market shares. Members of a cartel generally maintain their separate identities and financial independence while engaging in cooperative policies. Cartels can either be domestic (e.g., the historical example of the German IG Farben) or international (e.g.,OPEC). Because cartels restrict competition and result in higher prices for consumers, they are outlawed in some countries. The only industry operating in the U.S. with a blanket exemption from the antitrust laws is major league baseball, but several U.S. firms have been given permission to participate in international cartels.

 

[Mac1958]

"
Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

Hillary Don t Let Anybody Tell You That Businesses Create Jobs

When you think that government provides all, that we "didn't earn that", that everything we have is a gift from them...

...well, this is a natural instinct. Be thankful we're allowed to have what we have.

.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Businesses don't create jobs. Consumer demand creates jobs.

Therefore, it's more important to have well compensated workers than successful businesses.

This really isn't complicated to people who haven't sold out to the Koch Brothers.

Could you supply the phone # to "consumer demand" ? My kid needs a job, and maybe he can fill out a job application and get an interview.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

Just because you don't know what an oligopoly is, does not mean a cartel isn't an example of one.

Websters Definition of OLIGOPOLY

: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

oligopoly noun (Concise Encyclopedia) Market situation in which producers are so few that the actions of each of them have an impact on price and on competitors. Each producer must consider the effect of a price change on the others. A cut in price by one may lead to an equal reduction by the others, with the result that each firm will retain about the same share of the market as before but with a lower profit margin. Competition in oligopolistic industries thus tends to manifest itself in nonprice forms such as advertising and product differentiation. Oligopolies in the U.S. include the steel, aluminum, and automobile industries. See also cartel,monopoly.

Websters definition of Cartel:

Organization of a few independent producers for the purpose of improving the profitability of the firms involved (see oligopoly). This usually involves some restriction of output, control of price, and allocation of market shares. Members of a cartel generally maintain their separate identities and financial independence while engaging in cooperative policies. Cartels can either be domestic (e.g., the historical example of the German IG Farben) or international (e.g.,OPEC). Because cartels restrict competition and result in higher prices for consumers, they are outlawed in some countries. The only industry operating in the U.S. with a blanket exemption from the antitrust laws is major league baseball, but several U.S. firms have been given permission to participate in international cartels.

All producers affect the market, so your definition is meaningless. The definition is so broad and nebulous that it includes every industry on the planet. Which is just as the government toady economists intended since it gives the government justification for regulating every industry on the planet.

A cartel is something distinct from an oligopoly. A cartel is where businesses collude with each other to drive up prices. However, when the government toady economics wizards use the term "oligopoly" they are not referring to cartels. The point of the oligopoly term is to give government justification to step in where there is no collusion.

Not that your definition describes the behavior of highly competitive industries to be "oligopolistic." They all charge about the same price and compete based advertising or product differentiation. In other words, they attempt to sell consumers on the superiority of their product. If an industry was highly competitive, how would it behave any differently? Yet, your definition attempts to pain an oligopoly as something sinister.

The term is obvious horseshit.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, they are. Government has legally imposed all the monopolies that have ever existed. The term "oligopoly" is used by sycophantic government economists to denote the leading competitors in any industry. It's a propaganda term. It means nothing in terms of economics.

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

Just because you don't know what an oligopoly is, does not mean a cartel isn't an example of one.

Websters Definition of OLIGOPOLY

: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

oligopoly noun (Concise Encyclopedia) Market situation in which producers are so few that the actions of each of them have an impact on price and on competitors. Each producer must consider the effect of a price change on the others. A cut in price by one may lead to an equal reduction by the others, with the result that each firm will retain about the same share of the market as before but with a lower profit margin. Competition in oligopolistic industries thus tends to manifest itself in nonprice forms such as advertising and product differentiation. Oligopolies in the U.S. include the steel, aluminum, and automobile industries. See also cartel,monopoly.

Websters definition of Cartel:

Organization of a few independent producers for the purpose of improving the profitability of the firms involved (see oligopoly). This usually involves some restriction of output, control of price, and allocation of market shares. Members of a cartel generally maintain their separate identities and financial independence while engaging in cooperative policies. Cartels can either be domestic (e.g., the historical example of the German IG Farben) or international (e.g.,OPEC). Because cartels restrict competition and result in higher prices for consumers, they are outlawed in some countries. The only industry operating in the U.S. with a blanket exemption from the antitrust laws is major league baseball, but several U.S. firms have been given permission to participate in international cartels.

If you were referring to cartels, then why didn't you use the term?

Cartels have been tried countless times in the history of business, but they always fall apart unless they are government enforced. That's why you didn't say "cartel."

 

[The Rabbi]

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

Just because you don't know what an oligopoly is, does not mean a cartel isn't an example of one.

Websters Definition of OLIGOPOLY

: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

oligopoly noun (Concise Encyclopedia) Market situation in which producers are so few that the actions of each of them have an impact on price and on competitors. Each producer must consider the effect of a price change on the others. A cut in price by one may lead to an equal reduction by the others, with the result that each firm will retain about the same share of the market as before but with a lower profit margin. Competition in oligopolistic industries thus tends to manifest itself in nonprice forms such as advertising and product differentiation. Oligopolies in the U.S. include the steel, aluminum, and automobile industries. See also cartel,monopoly.

Websters definition of Cartel:

Organization of a few independent producers for the purpose of improving the profitability of the firms involved (see oligopoly). This usually involves some restriction of output, control of price, and allocation of market shares. Members of a cartel generally maintain their separate identities and financial independence while engaging in cooperative policies. Cartels can either be domestic (e.g., the historical example of the German IG Farben) or international (e.g.,OPEC). Because cartels restrict competition and result in higher prices for consumers, they are outlawed in some countries. The only industry operating in the U.S. with a blanket exemption from the antitrust laws is major league baseball, but several U.S. firms have been given permission to participate in international cartels.

If you were referring to cartels, then why didn't you use the term?

Cartels have been tried countless times in the history of business, but they always fall apart unless they are government enforced. That's why you didn't say "cartel."

Nice work there.
Yes, competitors in an industry all affect price overall so the definition is meaningless.
Monopolies etc dont exist outside of gov't sanctions and liberal minds.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Demand for goods and services creates jobs. Period.

Which is why we have flying cars that run on water.

Owning a business is a job. No demand for goods and services.......no jobs.

But all it takes to have goods or services is to demand, yes sparky?

Ignorance is the foundation of leftism.

 

[RKMBrown]

You're wrong. Here's one example OPEC - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are thousands of other examples, where producers collude on price to corner the market or at least attempt to and act together as a monopoly forcing out competition.

OPEC is not a monopoly. The US, Britain, and Norway are all non members but produce oil anyway.
Next.

I didn't call it a monopoly. It's an oligopoly.

It isnt that either. It's a cartel.
There are 30 non member producers vs 12 member state producers.

Just because you don't know what an oligopoly is, does not mean a cartel isn't an example of one.

Websters Definition of OLIGOPOLY

: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market

oligopoly noun (Concise Encyclopedia) Market situation in which producers are so few that the actions of each of them have an impact on price and on competitors. Each producer must consider the effect of a price change on the others. A cut in price by one may lead to an equal reduction by the others, with the result that each firm will retain about the same share of the market as before but with a lower profit margin. Competition in oligopolistic industries thus tends to manifest itself in nonprice forms such as advertising and product differentiation. Oligopolies in the U.S. include the steel, aluminum, and automobile industries. See also cartel,monopoly.

Websters definition of Cartel:

Organization of a few independent producers for the purpose of improving the profitability of the firms involved (see oligopoly). This usually involves some restriction of output, control of price, and allocation of market shares. Members of a cartel generally maintain their separate identities and financial independence while engaging in cooperative policies. Cartels can either be domestic (e.g., the historical example of the German IG Farben) or international (e.g.,OPEC). Because cartels restrict competition and result in higher prices for consumers, they are outlawed in some countries. The only industry operating in the U.S. with a blanket exemption from the antitrust laws is major league baseball, but several U.S. firms have been given permission to participate in international cartels.

All producers affect the market, so your definition is meaningless. The definition is so broad and nebulous that it includes every industry on the planet. Which is just as the government toady economists intended since it gives the government justification for regulating every industry on the planet.

A cartel is something distinct from an oligopoly. A cartel is where businesses collude with each other to drive up prices. However, when the government toady economics wizards use the term "oligopoly" they are not referring to cartels. The point of the oligopoly term is to give government justification to step in where there is no collusion.

Not that your definition describes the behavior of highly competitive industries to be "oligopolistic." They all charge about the same price and compete based advertising or product differentiation. In other words, they attempt to sell consumers on the superiority of their product. If an industry was highly competitive, how would it behave any differently? Yet, your definition attempts to pain an oligopoly as something sinister.

The term is obvious horseshit.

It's not my definition... it is "the definition." It's not my fault you are stuck on your version of the dictionary where everything is defined as horseshit.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Demand for goods and services creates jobs. Period.

Which is why we have flying cars that run on water.

Owning a business is a job. No demand for goods and services.......no jobs.

But all it takes to have goods or services is to demand, yes sparky?

Ignorance is the foundation of leftism.

It is easy to think you win debates when you are debating with yourself. You have entirely misrepresented my argument and then declared victory.

The stuff of true losers.

 

[Mac1958]

Businesses don't create jobs. Consumer demand creates jobs.

Therefore, it's more important to have well compensated workers than successful businesses.

This really isn't complicated to people who haven't sold out to the Koch Brothers.

Businesses produce the products that consumers demand so they do provide jobs

Businesses also drive consumer demand by producing products then convincing people they need those products which creates jobs. And IMO this is the larger part of the equation because most of the shit people buy are more convenience than necessity
So you see it is not as simplistic as you think

Anyone who has actually owned and operated a business of any significant size, or anyone who has ever been in a position of authority or responsibility in a company of any size, knows that a business will often have to invest in capital, human or otherwise, in anticipation of demand.

Yeah, that's a big risk, just one of many risks a business has to take. Every day. That's such a normal part of doing business that it's amazing this is even an issue.

The whole "business only hires when there is demand" meme is so silly and simplistic and naive and ignorant that trying to communicate with someone who actually thinks that is usually an abject waste of time.

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It is easy to think you win debates when you are debating with yourself. You have entirely misrepresented my argument and then declared victory.

The stuff of true losers.

You repeated a stupid claim that you have seen and heard on leftist websites. You don't grasp the concepts behind the fallacious claim, nor my response. The idea that demand gives rise to production (ergo jobs) is utter stupidity. It is akin to claiming that rain causes swimming pools - after all they are filled with water.

Demand creates nothing, not jobs, not products, not services. Demand is at best a catalyst for action; an industrious person or business may move to capture that demand, for their own profit.

 

[deltex1]

It's kind of odd that you fuckers still argue this point. It's not even complicated.

I'm a business owner. I ain't hiring anyone if I don't need them. I only need them if there is damned for what I am selling. I'm not running a charity.

The fact is without your business there woujd be NO job in the first place.

Well, no shit, Sherlock. However, if you had a coat store, and only 3 people in town could afford to buy a coat, you wouldn't stay in business very long. And you wouldn't take you tax cut money to hire people, only to have them stand around.

If you give those poor minimum wager earners a raise, they too can purchase a coat. Now you can go hire someone to help you sell coats.

Don't pay them more than the job justifies. Create a growing economy that provide better paying jobs.

 

[deltex1]

has Bubba been asked about Hillary's flub yet?

 

[francoHFW]

Demand for goods and services creates jobs. Period.

Which is why we have flying cars that run on water.

Owning a business is a job. No demand for goods and services.......no jobs.

But all it takes to have goods or services is to demand, yes sparky?

Ignorance is the foundation of leftism.

It is easy to think you win debates when you are debating with yourself. You have entirely misrepresented my argument and then declared victory.

The stuff of true losers.

Same thing Pubs do with Dems- like here. Trickle down doesn't work becomes businesses don't create jobs and away they go...brainwashed functional morons voting against their own interests and the country's.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It is easy to think you win debates when you are debating with yourself. You have entirely misrepresented my argument and then declared victory.

The stuff of true losers.

You repeated a stupid claim that you have seen and heard on leftist websites. You don't grasp the concepts behind the fallacious claim, nor my response. The idea that demand gives rise to production (ergo jobs) is utter stupidity. It is akin to claiming that rain causes swimming pools - after all they are filled with water.

Demand creates nothing, not jobs, not products, not services. Demand is at best a catalyst for action; an industrious person or business may move to capture that demand, for their own profit.

That is really great doublespeak.

It's basic stuff.

All you assholes want to talk about is the inventor....or the innovative idea. As if that is a standard of some kind.

I'm talking about long term.....large scale economics. You know....the shit that sustains modern industrialized nations.

If demand decreases.....jobs will be cut. If it increases, jobs will be created.

If a business owner is worth a shit....he will JUMP at any opportunity to cut payroll if he can maintain production that meets demand. That is very easy when demand drops.

Go ahead....bore me some more.

 

[francoHFW]

has Bubba been asked about Hillary's flub yet?

Ever seen a full quote of what she was saying, hater dupe?