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.
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.
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.
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.
It seems that no one in a position to make decisions is able to comprehend the fact that the less money the consumer has to spend, the less money there is to flow in the economic system. As long as the wealthy are able to hold onto what they rake in, and the consumer is required to foot the bill, the economy will not get healthy.
The theory that if the wealthy have money to spend, they'll invest in additional facilities and employees is about as valid as the "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMY". It really does not cost them to build facilities or hire employees because those things are deducted from their income. Once deducted, it is not part of what they are taxed on.
It seems that no one in a position to make decisions is able to comprehend the fact that the less money the consumer has to spend, the less money there is to flow in the economic system. As long as the wealthy are able to hold onto what they rake in, and the consumer is required to foot the bill, the economy will not get healthy.
The theory that if the wealthy have money to spend, they'll invest in additional facilities and employees is about as valid as the "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMY". It really does not cost them to build facilities or hire employees because those things are deducted from their income. Once deducted, it is not part of what they are taxed on.
Then I take it that it was consumer demand for steel construction that created jobs in steel manufacturing. It's just that steel is hard to digest.
If there are no consumers then there is no revenue for a business. It's as simple as that.
The rich only invest when the see a market for goods and service THAT WILL BE CONSUMED.
Exactly. The entrepreneur will see potential demand for a product and try to serve that demand. He's not going to pour money into a product in which there is no demand.
Republicans believe that lowering taxes mainly on the rich is a good idea, but it isn't. Shift the tax burden away from the middle class, and they'll have more disposable income to spend money on things that the wealthy make. The higher the demand, the more the entrepreneur will try to sell. It's really a basic concept. I don't understand why so many people in this country don't get it.
If there are no consumers then there is no revenue for a business. It's as simple as that.
The rich only invest when the see a market for goods and service THAT WILL BE CONSUMED.
Yeah, and all they have to do is borrow funds from the consumer to create the business. Then the consumer can spend his interest income on that product. Well, if he isn't taxed to death.
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.
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.
