Why does the left think the government can create jobs?

[JRK]

Those that don't pull their own weight form groups like OWS .

That is the type of citizen we have created with the nanny state; one who truly believes they deserve to take from others so they don't have to take care of themselves.

I'm not familiar with the abbreviation "OWS".

Entitlement parasites are only part of the problem. When the economy is good they're no big deal. But unless American workers start considering the concept of sacrifice, and American businesspeople are willing to innovate...we're dead in the water...and no amount of tossing people off welfare and cutting government worker benefits will make any difference. The American economic machine was once described as a sleeping giant in 1940 or so....now it's a very sick patient. It's overweight, malnourished, and has stable angina (for the moment). It needs a sensable diet and an exercize plan. Not for the entitlement folks, as much as for the average tax paying American worker and businesman.

I didn't vote for Obama in 2008, and I'm not sure who I'll vote for in 2012....but I cannot emphasize enough how very little he is in terms of the problem.

We keep losing sectors and the govt will not allow in any news to be opened, especially the oil sands sector and nuclear energy. Our company just picked up a 500 million dollar expansion project. The project consists of the construction of a new 83,000-barrels-per-day facility that uses the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process. SAGD is a commonly used method to recover oil in the oil sands region. The project is located 63 kilometers southeast of Fort McMurray, Alberta.
We have the same here but are not allowed to touch it

 

[Dragon]

And payouts from a private employer are different how exactly?

The difference is that, in a time of slack consumer demand like the present, payouts from a private employer will not be made. Those by the government, however, will, if we vote for them.

 

[Dragon]

Look from 2001 to 2010 I had brought home 33,000.00 more due to Bushes tax cuts.
I have spent that money on a travel trailer and a pick up truck. I am one of millions in that tax bracket that have spent trillions of cash that would have been thrown away to god knows what if the Federal govt would have kept it

What tax bracket? The Bush tax cuts paid at least some money to all taxpayers, although the bulk of the benefits went to the very wealthy. The tax cuts for middle-class people were, frankly, the political price for passing the tax cuts for the rich; if it could have been passed as a rich-only cut it would have been, but that was not politically possible.

Since it gave some tax relief to everyone, though, to some degree it did spur consumer spending which gave a small boost to the economy. That works to a degree, although it's still not a good idea when it results in a big peacetime/non-recession deficit, and when it's combined with two asinine wars and an unfunded prescription drug benefit, well . . . that's fiscal stupidity on a grand scale.

The point though is that directly cutting taxes for the rich on the theory that increasing available capital will result in job creation doesn't work. The theory is unsound, because availability of capital is not what drives or limits job creation. Consumer demand is. If you own a business, you hire someone only if you need another employee. You need another employee if you can't serve your customers adequately with the staff you have. If you DON'T need another employee, you're not going to hire one just because you have some extra money lying around. And that is the flaw in supply-side thinking.

 

[G.T.]

if someone is employed by the government the government has created a job.
if someone is employed by a private company as a result of needing workers for a government contract that they won, the government has created a job.

 

[JRK]

Look from 2001 to 2010 I had brought home 33,000.00 more due to Bushes tax cuts.
I have spent that money on a travel trailer and a pick up truck. I am one of millions in that tax bracket that have spent trillions of cash that would have been thrown away to god knows what if the Federal govt would have kept it

What tax bracket? The Bush tax cuts paid at least some money to all taxpayers, although the bulk of the benefits went to the very wealthy. The tax cuts for middle-class people were, frankly, the political price for passing the tax cuts for the rich; if it could have been passed as a rich-only cut it would have been, but that was not politically possible.

Since it gave some tax relief to everyone, though, to some degree it did spur consumer spending which gave a small boost to the economy. That works to a degree, although it's still not a good idea when it results in a big peacetime/non-recession deficit, and when it's combined with two asinine wars and an unfunded prescription drug benefit, well . . . that's fiscal stupidity on a grand scale.

The point though is that directly cutting taxes for the rich on the theory that increasing available capital will result in job creation doesn't work. The theory is unsound, because availability of capital is not what drives or limits job creation. Consumer demand is. If you own a business, you hire someone only if you need another employee. You need another employee if you can't serve your customers adequately with the staff you have. If you DON'T need another employee, you're not going to hire one just because you have some extra money lying around. And that is the flaw in supply-side thinking.

75,000 75,050 17,939 15,307 18,818 16,438
for the year 2000
75,000 75,050 15,634 12,231 15,986 14,356
for the year 2004
This is not all I had, but 33,000 is very close, maybe a little short with all of the other stuff I have (claiming single)
Google it IRS tax table

 

[Skull Pilot]

if someone is employed by the government the government has created a job.
if someone is employed by a private company as a result of needing workers for a government contract that they won, the government has created a job.

The difference being that the private sector job creates wealth while the government job destroys it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm not familiar with the abbreviation "OWS".

Entitlement parasites are only part of the problem. When the economy is good they're no big deal. But unless American workers start considering the concept of sacrifice, and American businesspeople are willing to innovate...we're dead in the water...and no amount of tossing people off welfare and cutting government worker benefits will make any difference. The American economic machine was once described as a sleeping giant in 1940 or so....now it's a very sick patient. It's overweight, malnourished, and has stable angina (for the moment). It needs a sensable diet and an exercize plan. Not for the entitlement folks, as much as for the average tax paying American worker and businesman.

I didn't vote for Obama in 2008, and I'm not sure who I'll vote for in 2012....but I cannot emphasize enough how very little he is in terms of the problem.

We keep losing sectors and the govt will not allow in any news to be opened, especially the oil sands sector and nuclear energy. Our company just picked up a 500 million dollar expansion project. The project consists of the construction of a new 83,000-barrels-per-day facility that uses the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process. SAGD is a commonly used method to recover oil in the oil sands region. The project is located 63 kilometers southeast of Fort McMurray, Alberta.
We have the same here but are not allowed to touch it

check your use of the quote function. What you have attributed to me was not my quote.

 

[JRK]

if someone is employed by the government the government has created a job.
if someone is employed by a private company as a result of needing workers for a government contract that they won, the government has created a job.

The difference being that the private sector job creates wealth while the government job destroys it.

what they seem to ignore is it takes private sector monies to pay for that Govt job

Every penny I put into welfare for an able bodied person who has 4 kids, is single and will never work is absolute destruction of my wealth
Its just the way it is

 

[Bern80]

And payouts from a private employer are different how exactly?

The difference is that, in a time of slack consumer demand like the present, payouts from a private employer will not be made. Those by the government, however, will, if we vote for them.

And that's not good Dragon. When the economy is tough, when people are getting paid less or not at all, there is less tax revenue going to government. Government can't sit and pretend it's isolated from the effects of a bad economy especially when it too, just like a business, has less money to go around. Skull is right. You really need to learn how to play follow the money. If you did you would see that what you are saying is simply, mathematically incorrect.

 

[JRK]

And payouts from a private employer are different how exactly?

The difference is that, in a time of slack consumer demand like the present, payouts from a private employer will not be made. Those by the government, however, will, if we vote for them.

And that's not good Dragon. When the economy is tough, when people are getting paid less or not at all, there is less tax revenue going to government. Government can't sit and pretend it's isolated from the effects of a bad economy especially when it too, just like a business, has less money to go around. Skull is right. You really need to learn how to play follow the money. If you did you would see that what you are saying is simply, mathematically incorrect.

The company I work with just picked up a 500 million dollar oil sands project, in Canada. After 15 years it looks as though we are going to close our US operations
Its nuts

 

[toxicmedia]

I'm not familiar with the abbreviation "OWS".

Entitlement parasites are only part of the problem. When the economy is good they're no big deal. But unless American workers start considering the concept of sacrifice, and American businesspeople are willing to innovate...we're dead in the water...and no amount of tossing people off welfare and cutting government worker benefits will make any difference. The American economic machine was once described as a sleeping giant in 1940 or so....now it's a very sick patient. It's overweight, malnourished, and has stable angina (for the moment). It needs a sensable diet and an exercize plan. Not for the entitlement folks, as much as for the average tax paying American worker and businesman.

I didn't vote for Obama in 2008, and I'm not sure who I'll vote for in 2012....but I cannot emphasize enough how very little he is in terms of the problem.

We keep losing sectors and the govt will not allow in any news to be opened, especially the oil sands sector and nuclear energy. Our company just picked up a 500 million dollar expansion project. The project consists of the construction of a new 83,000-barrels-per-day facility that uses the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process. SAGD is a commonly used method to recover oil in the oil sands region. The project is located 63 kilometers southeast of Fort McMurray, Alberta.
We have the same here but are not allowed to touch it

All good points.....but the US is no longer competitive in industries like oil production, agriculture, manufacturing, and all the other industries that fueled prosperity between 1950-1985 or so. The only reason Americans will ever buy energy that is expensive to extract...is when Venezuelan, Mexican, Nigerian, and Arabian penninsula oil is more expensive, and that won't happen because it'll run out for them first.

I guess my point is that we need to make SIGNIFICANT cuts to social security, medicare, and defense. Then the private business sector needs to sober up, and recognize the terrain it faces.

Cutting goverment worker benefits, and allowing energy companies to produce without restrictions from the EPA or Obama admin, and kicking people off welfare, and cutting government funding to NPR, and electing a Republican in 2012, and lowering taxes even more.......................is not enough to get us back to 1950-2000 prosperity levels.

The Obama policies, right or wrong, have neither created, nor perpetuated, our current economic crisis in significant enough ways to affix any significant blame for it...in Obama's lap. That notion is pure GOP electioneering.

 

[Full-Auto]

We keep losing sectors and the govt will not allow in any news to be opened, especially the oil sands sector and nuclear energy. Our company just picked up a 500 million dollar expansion project. The project consists of the construction of a new 83,000-barrels-per-day facility that uses the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process. SAGD is a commonly used method to recover oil in the oil sands region. The project is located 63 kilometers southeast of Fort McMurray, Alberta.
We have the same here but are not allowed to touch it

All good points.....but the US is no longer competitive in industries like oil production, agriculture, manufacturing, and all the other industries that fueled prosperity between 1950-1985 or so. The only reason Americans will ever buy energy that is expensive to extract...is when Venezuelan, Mexican, Nigerian, and Arabian penninsula oil is more expensive, and that won't happen because it'll run out for them first.

I guess my point is that we need to make SIGNIFICANT cuts to social security, medicare, and defense. Then the private business sector needs to sober up, and recognize the terrain it faces.

Cutting goverment worker benefits, and allowing energy companies to produce without restrictions from the EPA or Obama admin, and kicking people off welfare, and cutting government funding to NPR, and electing a Republican in 2012, and lowering taxes even more.......................is not enough to get us back to 1950-2000 prosperity levels.

The Obama policies, right or wrong, have neither created, nor perpetuated, our current economic crisis in significant enough ways to affix any significant blame for it...in Obama's lap. That notion is pure GOP electioneering.

I can go with that for the most part. But when you got to perpetuated we parted company.

The constant drum roll of the fair share along with other policy decisions make that point far fetched.

 

[Jackson]

When the US Govt takes 1 trillion dollars of our wealth to "create a job" as Obama did, then all they have done is take 1 trillion dollars (really about 800 billion) of our wealth and re distributed it
It is wealth destruction is all it is

the private sector with the right conditions can create real jobs. How many jobs would that same 800 billion create in the private sector If the those who really pay taxes were allowed to keep that wealth?
What we purchase with that wealth would create work and we would get too keep the end product, instead of it becoming part of Obama's re-election campaign fund
That is real trickle down economics made simple. Allow the tax payer to keep more of his wealth, show him you can be trusted and watch him use it to grow the economy

Now JRK, don't be so hard on the left. I have to really disagree with you. They can create jobs. The president has proved it. The minor problem was the cost of one job could have been used to create an entire industry.

 

[Katzndogz]

The result of higher taxes can be seen right now.

That's the result of lower taxes. Taxes have not yet been raised.

It's really the result of instability. Even if taxes have not yet been raised, no one knows when or how high. No investment until stability resturns. Unless you want to invest in China, they are quite stable.

 

[Jarhead]

if someone is employed by the government the government has created a job.
if someone is employed by a private company as a result of needing workers for a government contract that they won, the government has created a job.

well, seeing as the government does not generate an income....

I give credit to the taxpayer for creating a job.

 

[JRK]

When the US Govt takes 1 trillion dollars of our wealth to "create a job" as Obama did, then all they have done is take 1 trillion dollars (really about 800 billion) of our wealth and re distributed it
It is wealth destruction is all it is

the private sector with the right conditions can create real jobs. How many jobs would that same 800 billion create in the private sector If the those who really pay taxes were allowed to keep that wealth?
What we purchase with that wealth would create work and we would get too keep the end product, instead of it becoming part of Obama's re-election campaign fund
That is real trickle down economics made simple. Allow the tax payer to keep more of his wealth, show him you can be trusted and watch him use it to grow the economy

Now JRK, don't be so hard on the left. I have to really disagree with you. They can create jobs. The president has proved it. The minor problem was the cost of one job could have been used to create an entire industry.

Jackson the destruction of wealth creates nothing. That job Obama created for 200-400,000 equates to you and I losing that much in wealth today or down the road
My god at the jobs that we could create leaving that much wealth in the hands of the middle class
We have printed 4 trillion dollars sense 08. That means that sense 2008 we have printed enough money to run this county for 18 months using the 2007 budget

Thisnk of how many jobs we could create if NO_ONE paid taxes for 18 months?

 

[Jackson]

When the US Govt takes 1 trillion dollars of our wealth to "create a job" as Obama did, then all they have done is take 1 trillion dollars (really about 800 billion) of our wealth and re distributed it
It is wealth destruction is all it is

the private sector with the right conditions can create real jobs. How many jobs would that same 800 billion create in the private sector If the those who really pay taxes were allowed to keep that wealth?
What we purchase with that wealth would create work and we would get too keep the end product, instead of it becoming part of Obama's re-election campaign fund
That is real trickle down economics made simple. Allow the tax payer to keep more of his wealth, show him you can be trusted and watch him use it to grow the economy

Now JRK, don't be so hard on the left. I have to really disagree with you. They can create jobs. The president has proved it. The minor problem was the cost of one job could have been used to create an entire industry.

Jackson the destruction of wealth creates nothing. That job Obama created for 200-400,000 equates to you and I losing that much in wealth today or down the road
My god at the jobs that we could create leaving that much wealth in the hands of the middle class
We have printed 4 trillion dollars sense 08. That means that sense 2008 we have printed enough money to run this county for 18 months using the 2007 budget

Thisnk of how many jobs we could create if NO_ONE paid taxes for 18 months?

I agree. We have to have the private sector (small business) confident and able to do the hiring while the middle class can purchase goods.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

When the US Govt takes 1 trillion dollars of our wealth to "create a job" as Obama did, then all they have done is take 1 trillion dollars (really about 800 billion) of our wealth and re distributed it
It is wealth destruction is all it is

the private sector with the right conditions can create real jobs. How many jobs would that same 800 billion create in the private sector If the those who really pay taxes were allowed to keep that wealth?
What we purchase with that wealth would create work and we would get too keep the end product, instead of it becoming part of Obama's re-election campaign fund
That is real trickle down economics made simple. Allow the tax payer to keep more of his wealth, show him you can be trusted and watch him use it to grow the economy

It's funny. When some conservatives get some idea in their head, regardless of how ridiculous it may be, they ALL seem to run with it as if it was the gospel truth.

Remember Lewis and Clark? How about the Hoover Dam? Does the interstate highway system ring a bell?

What exactly is ridiculous about being against the spending of 3 trillion dollars that was not Obama's to be spending to start with, that we had to borrow, that we used to lose 6 million jobs during the same time?
hats a joke right?

Hey......every once-in-a-while.....

....TOO-often, really....

.....ya' gotta pay-DOWN Bush-generated DEBT!!!!

*

*

Let's see proof o' that 3 trillion dollars you were talkin'-about......'cause PORKY LIMBAUGH SAID SO! just ain't gonna cut it.​

 

[JRK]

Can you explain to me this?
Submitted by George W. Bush
Submitted to 109th Congress
Total revenue $2.57 trillion
Total expenditures $2.73 trillion
Deficit $161 billion
Debt $8.95 trillion
Website Congressional Budget Office
how is this accurate deficit as shown of 161 billion and that crap you have shows 500 billion for the same year?
Lets not forget that from 94 thru 06 except the senate in 01-02 was a GOP budget also. All the president can do is ask
2007 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[BDBoop]

If the left is wrong, then why does the right blame the President for the unemployment rate?