Don t Let Anybody Tell You That Businesses Create Jobs

[BlackSand]

Yeah, we know: jobs create jobs. And around the 1% wheel of circular logic we go.

Spending creates jobs.

Risk creates jobs ... And spending satisfies demand which is dependent on supply.

.

 

[BlackSand]

How does any politician say something this stupid?

It's the truth.

Because stupid people believe it.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yeah, we know: jobs create jobs. And around the 1% wheel of circular logic we go.

Spending creates jobs.

Risk creates jobs ... And spending satisfies demand which is dependent on supply.

.

Demand is dependent upon supply? Cool story.

 

[The Rabbi]

That's actually 5 years' total expenses.
And even that is wrong on any basis, as it assumes no revenue.
Remind us how you eanred a masters in business from Columbia.
Noob.

Don't you need capital to pay expenses?

Now you are using the word "capital" in a different sense hoping no one notices.
You're a piece of work for sure.

 

[The Rabbi]

.

The only time I've ever seen the term "total capital' used was as a measure of a bank's financial health.

What in the world does this have to do with the thread?

Total capital is used to measure the health of any business.

No, actually it isnt.
Quick ratio, acid test and otehrs measure it.

Please tell me you don't invest your own money......

Because I threw out some terms you've never heard of?

 

[The Rabbi]

I can't help it if you don't know the meaning of total capital.

It's meaningless. DOes "total capital" mean the total of expenditures? The total net worth of the business times 5? There's no such thing as "total capital". This must be something else you learned in your masters of business at Columbia.

He doesn't know what it means. He just read it on some business blog.

Amusing! Neither one of you know know the term total capital. Very telling.

Here's your chance to show off what you learned with a masters in business from Columbia! Enlighten us poor rubes!

Columbia is where Buffett went. It's the most left leaning Econ department in the country.

No wonder this guy can't get things right either.

This guy went to Columbia. Pictures. When he last saw a movie. Other than that he's obviously spent zero time in any institution of learning beyond high school.

 

[The Rabbi]

We're all waiting for 1%braincell to explain it to us.

Since you rubes can't figure it out I'll tell you.

Five years total capital is all the money the you need to operate for five years.

You have to be kidding. Anyone who has that much money doesn't need to start a business. He's already a multimillionaire.

Evem so, what does 5 years' worth of total spending do? Allow you to be owner fo the company for 5 years without making any sales? Why 5? Why not 3? Why not 10?
It's absurd. Only someone with zero knowledge of business could make such a statement.

 

[zeke]

Risk creates jobs ... And spending satisfies demand which is dependent on supply.

You stupid fuckers write nonsense and treat it as gospel. ******* weird ass right wingers.

 

[zeke]

. Only someone with zero knowledge of business could make such a statement.

You mean like YOU? You should go back and read some of the nonsense you write.

 

[The Rabbi]

Risk creates jobs ... And spending satisfies demand which is dependent on supply.

You stupid fuckers write nonsense and treat it as gospel. ******* weird ass right wingers.

You just dont get it, Zeke. I guess thats what comes from sitting in a trailer park cashing government checks for your living.

 

[BlackSand]

Yeah, we know: jobs create jobs. And around the 1% wheel of circular logic we go.

Spending creates jobs.

Risk creates jobs ... And spending satisfies demand which is dependent on supply.

.

Demand is dependent upon supply? Cool story.

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Yet you have the most difficult time effectively proving that amidst all the examples that demonstrate otherwise, and you are unable to counter. Let me guess, you are one of those extremists who somehow believes a deep recession can be revived through federal unemployment extensions, that takes from government revenue at a rate that is more than it could possibly hope to recoup in return. In which case you'd have more luck turning water into wine than seeing 99 weeks of unemployment creating a strong thriving economy. If such a theory among Democrats is true, why have household incomes dropped under this administration and the economy remains stagnant?

Middle class spending creates jobs.

Again, you just confirmed my point, nothing's changed. Are you now discovering you are having trouble finding a way to back up your position? We all knew as much, and tried to tell you.

 

[zeke]

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

You write this stuff like you just figured it out.

"Supply does not have to meet demand" Well no shit. And companies lose money when they have consumers wanting to buy and not enough product to meet the demand.

Then it is; "demand can only be satisfied by supply" And again, no shit. And when the supply no longer meets the demand guess what happens? Companies hire people to make enough product to meet the demand.

Do you really not know this shit?

 

[The Rabbi]

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

You write this stuff like you just figured it out.

"Supply does not have to meet demand" Well no shit. And companies lose money when they have consumers wanting to buy and not enough product to meet the demand.

Then it is; "demand can only be satisfied by supply" And again, no shit. And when the supply no longer meets the demand guess what happens? Companies hire people to make enough product to meet the demand.

Do you really not know this shit?

Apparently you don't.

 

[BlackSand]

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

You write this stuff like you just figured it out.

"Supply does not have to meet demand" Well no shit. And companies lose money when they have consumers wanting to buy and not enough product to meet the demand.

Then it is; "demand can only be satisfied by supply" And again, no shit. And when the supply no longer meets the demand guess what happens? Companies hire people to make enough product to meet the demand.

Do you really not know this shit?

Of course I know what it means ... I know how jobs get created.
Demand doesn't create supply.

When someone creates a business ... They create supply ... Which creates products that can be marketed to create demand. To suggest that supply doesn't exist without demand negates the idea anyone ever buys something they didn't intend to buy when they left the house ... Or that all products bought were demanded by consumers ... Which is not true.

.

 

[Iceweasel]

Libs see everything exactly backwards. The people create the business that the government allows to take place. I guess so we can all live and breathe more government air and share our good fortune with those who didn't win life's lottery like the business owner busting his ass.

I've worked for many libs though and the sharing thing goes out the window when we're talking about their pocketbooks. Go figure.

 

[BlackSand]

Libs see everything exactly backwards.

I agree with this part ... They see everything backwards in attempts to create or shore up their own relevancy.

.

 

[zeke]

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

You write this stuff like you just figured it out.

"Supply does not have to meet demand" Well no shit. And companies lose money when they have consumers wanting to buy and not enough product to meet the demand.

Then it is; "demand can only be satisfied by supply" And again, no shit. And when the supply no longer meets the demand guess what happens? Companies hire people to make enough product to meet the demand.

Do you really not know this shit?

Of course I know what it means ... I know how jobs get created.
Demand doesn't create supply.

When someone creates a business ... They create supply ... Which creates products that can be marketed to create demand. To suggest that supply doesn't exist without demand negates the idea anyone ever buys something they didn't intend to buy when they left the house ... Or that all products bought were demanded by consumers ... Which is not true.

.

Let say I want to open a machine shop. You think I will just go out and purchase or rent shop space, spend big money on machines and material and labor (machinists make good money).......then I am going to go out and TRY and find SOMEONE who has a need for the product my machine shop could build? Is that what you think?

It don't work that way. It can't work that way. Someone opens a new business BECAUSE they have recognized a DEMAND in the market place and they are going to try and fill that demand by opening a new business.
Not the other way around.

Now if you have an example of someone that spent their money to open a business THEN went out and tried to find customers, lets hear it.


One of the prime reasons small business's fail is that they failed to recognize how much demand there would be for the new business. If it was the other way around, there wouldn't be any small business failures. Right. People would just open their doors and the company would prosper.

Nope. Don't work that way.

 

[Kosh]

Supply does not have to meet demand ... Demand can only be satisfied by supply.

You write this stuff like you just figured it out.

"Supply does not have to meet demand" Well no shit. And companies lose money when they have consumers wanting to buy and not enough product to meet the demand.

Then it is; "demand can only be satisfied by supply" And again, no shit. And when the supply no longer meets the demand guess what happens? Companies hire people to make enough product to meet the demand.

Do you really not know this shit?

Of course I know what it means ... I know how jobs get created.
Demand doesn't create supply.

When someone creates a business ... They create supply ... Which creates products that can be marketed to create demand. To suggest that supply doesn't exist without demand negates the idea anyone ever buys something they didn't intend to buy when they left the house ... Or that all products bought were demanded by consumers ... Which is not true.

.

Let say I want to open a machine shop. You think I will just go out and purchase or rent shop space, spend big money on machines and material and labor (machinists make good money).......then I am going to go out and TRY and find SOMEONE who has a need for the product my machine shop could build? Is that what you think?

It don't work that way. It can't work that way. Someone opens a new business BECAUSE they have recognized a DEMAND in the market place and they are going to try and fill that demand by opening a new business.
Not the other way around.

Now if you have an example of someone that spent their money to open a business THEN went out and tried to find customers, lets hear it.


One of the prime reasons small business's fail is that they failed to recognize how much demand there would be for the new business. If it was the other way around, there wouldn't be any small business failures. Right. People would just open their doors and the company would prosper.

Nope. Don't work that way.

Why not just brag about hiring under paid illegals to build fortune again?

 

[zeke]

I agree with this part ... They see everything backwards in attempts to create or shore up their own relevancy.

Go ahead dude. What is it I am "seeing backwards"?