Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obviously the consumers do. They decide what they want, go to whatever location at which they'll purchase their goods and WAIT ! ! ! ! for someone to open a business.
Genius!
I've always wondered why people want to live next to Walmarts, as opposed to Walmarts moving to locations with people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
Governments and unions do
Not since 2009.
Size of government payroll:
2001-2008: +1.75 million
2009-2012: -0.59 million
I think too many here are trying to compare the "rich" people to those who invest only. Obama promised that you had to make over $250,000 to be rich and have to pay higher taxes. I love it when people from the left talk about the rich and confuse small business entrepreneurs with wealthy people who primarily invest.
What I am trying to tell you folks is that rich is a heavily used word that means different things to different people. To me it means the very wealthy who are primarily investors and to Obama and his supporters they are anybody who makes too much (over $250,000). How many of you give any thought to the fact that most small businesses figure their taxes the same as most of us here do and many of you don't like them getting to subtract business costs from what they made.
.
One poster referred to the fact that if consumers create jobs they must get together someplace and wait for some business man to recognize them and their desire for goods he can produce. That referred to the fact that you people who want consumers to be the real creators just don't really see what is coming at us. Consumers may well create an atmosphere in which more products are needed but someone has to produce those things that consumers sure don't create.
I think that many of you need to take a peek at what you are saying as to who actually creates the products and provides the jobs.
Very good points. And by todays standards, making $250,000 a yr, is not considered rich at all. Comfortable, but not rich.
Rich means different things to different people, and your right to believe what you feel rich is.
However i do know that Obama is always putting the Rich Down, always, until it comes to HIS GETTING CAPAIGN FUNDS AND DONATIONS, then he loves them. Then it is hit me with all that you can. If he sincerely does not like the rich, why take thier money. Kind of hypocritical.
However i do know that Obama is always putting the Rich Down, always, until it comes to HIS GETTING CAPAIGN FUNDS AND DONATIONS, then he loves them. Then it is hit me with all that you can. If he sincerely does not like the rich, why take thier money. Kind of hypocritical.
Do you also know that these rich people are fools?
This is the slide presentation that the current TED conference deemed "too politically controversial".
The slides show the inverse relationship between the tax rate for the top 1% and the unemployment rate.
Anyone who's ever run a business knows that hiring more people is a capitalists course of last resort, something we do only when increasing customer demand requires it. In this sense, calling ourselves job creators isn't just inaccurate, it's disingenuous.
That's why our current policies are so upside down. When you have a tax system in which most of the exemptions and the lowest rates benefit the richest, all in the name of job creation, all that happens is that the rich get richer.
Since 1980 the share of income for the richest Americans has more than tripled while effective tax rates have declined by close to 50%.
If it were true that lower tax rates and more wealth for the wealthy would lead to more job creation, then today we would be drowning in jobs. And yet unemployment and under-employment is at record highs.
If you needed a job, would you seek out the homeless guy with no money or a person with money to pay you?
No. You would be looking for a capitalist who wants to take advantage of the promises that customers bring. Only an idiot would start a business without the promise of getting the consumers. But then, things probably work differently, that businesses are opened without regard to the promise of selling goods and services, instead that they are there will bring customers? "The typical conservative logic".
Would you take your best guess (I refrain from calling it logic) as to why private sector dropped an unprecedented 800K+ jobs in December 2008, in a string of job losses that amounted to more jobs deleted in a year than added over previous 8 years? Lack of consumers, or lack of rich people with money to produce more?
I can't function without consumers. Somebody's gotta buy my product.
If the people really wanted to enact change, they'd boycott companies who don't take care of their employees. Even the public "thought" of a boycott could cause the corporation's stock to fall.
Consumers have power in these times. That powers comes in numbers. If the people were organized, or if ENOUGH people were organized, they could single handedly enact change.
Consumption drives most job creation. The exception being job creation linked directly to the creation of new markets, as in a newly created product that generates it own demand. But even in that case it comes down to the consumers buying in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
This is the slide presentation that the current TED conference deemed "too politically controversial".
The slides show the inverse relationship between the tax rate for the top 1% and the unemployment rate.
Anyone who's ever run a business knows that hiring more people is a capitalists course of last resort, something we do only when increasing customer demand requires it. In this sense, calling ourselves job creators isn't just inaccurate, it's disingenuous.
That's why our current policies are so upside down. When you have a tax system in which most of the exemptions and the lowest rates benefit the richest, all in the name of job creation, all that happens is that the rich get richer.
Since 1980 the share of income for the richest Americans has more than tripled while effective tax rates have declined by close to 50%.
If it were true that lower tax rates and more wealth for the wealthy would lead to more job creation, then today we would be drowning in jobs. And yet unemployment and under-employment is at record highs.
No. You would be looking for a capitalist who wants to take advantage of the promises that customers bring. Only an idiot would start a business without the promise of getting the consumers. But then, things probably work differently, that businesses are opened without regard to the promise of selling goods and services, instead that they are there will bring customers? "The typical conservative logic".
Would you take your best guess (I refrain from calling it logic) as to why private sector dropped an unprecedented 800K+ jobs in December 2008, in a string of job losses that amounted to more jobs deleted in a year than added over previous 8 years? Lack of consumers, or lack of rich people with money to produce more?
the question was do the rich really create jobs ?
The most simple response is to understand you can not create a job if you do not have the money to do so
the question was do the rich really create jobs ?
The most simple response is to understand you can not create a job if you do not have the money to do so
The wealthy "employ" workers, it is consumption that creates jobs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.