It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No Mr. Romney, Rich People Do Not Create Jobs

page: 10
60
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

As I am feeling under the weather and am somewhat loopy from antihistamines I am going to allow my self the risk of adding my comment.- though I suspect, from what I've read - that some of you may have already covered this.

Supply-side, or "trickle down" economics is not capitalism. What's more, by it's less frequently used proper name, Keynesian economics, actually works. BUT, by "working" I mean to say it accomplishes exactly what it's proponents desire.

I recall the primaries where Bush and Reagan faced off... and then potential presidential candidate George Bush referred to the Reagan economic choice as "Voodoo economics." The media coined it "Reaganomics" and the sound-bite-ready moniker stuck.

A simple Wiki query tells us that:

"Advocates of Keynesian economics argue that private sector decisions sometimes lead to inefficient macroeconomic outcomes which require active policy responses by the public sector, particularly monetary policy actions by the central bank and fiscal policy actions by the government to stabilize output over the business cycle."

And therein lies the sad reality so very few seem to appreciate or acknowledge.

Our nation's government was never intended to be the 'arbiter' of commerce, as it is today. Many realize that there is no free market, hence to say we are "capitalists" is a gross misstatement. Our politicians DO NOT want a "free market." Especially not since the adoption of "Reaganomics" which justifies direct government intervention in commerce AT ALL TIMES IN ANY WAY IMAGINABLE.

Our problem is that the "trickle down" actually worked.... the wealthy got richer .... and the government actors got "trickled down on" in a shower of golden financial opportunities .... in other words, THEY are the beneficiaries of trickle down... not the citizens. Of course, the fact that government actors can speculate, engage in investments with inside knowledge, and generally join the "club" of heavy hitters, demonstrates why this paradigm has been coddled.

But let's not forget the true underlying principle that causes the grief and places self-serving businessmen in positions of public authority..... mercantilism.

Again from the usually overly-simplistic Wiki:

"Mercantilism is the economic doctrine that government control of foreign trade is of paramount importance for ensuring the military security of the state."

Our diplomats are engaged in commerce... not diplomacy; which is why the Wikileaks fiasco was such a blow to the State department. People think the administrations US representatives abroad are serving their nation... they are not... they are in fact mostly serving the financial sponsors of the political regime in power....mostly.

The Supranational Banking Cartel controlling nearly everything enjoys benefits from all of this, since it's board members have a monopoly on both currency AND monetary policy (practically over the entire planet.) The Central Banks which happen to underwrite every transaction conducted in the world, cannot lose. As perpetual "middlemen" they get to skim a fee or a cut from every transaction - ad infinitum.

Our government is not about "governing" anymore... it's about revenue.... I suspect there are more than a few in it who pine for the days of slavery again. And this time, they won't bother with a superficial excuse like skin color, tomorrow's slaves will be debt slaves..... technically - we are already there.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.








edit on 18-10-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


That's where the system has gone awry. The shareholders demand an increase in revenue to enjoy a return on their investment. Largess to employees are usually done in limited companies not subject to public company pressures.

One only has to look at UPS and the millionaire employees created there as well as that .com outfit,the name escapes, just in the last few months made millionaires out of their staff.

While those are extreme, the companies that are privately held or single owners are much more likely to treat their emloyees better. (of course, you can always work for the gov't, their packets are limitless)....



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I care. I do care.
I am really tired of the lyrics to that song there. I care and I am tired of people that live in a bubble not seeing the real reality of this time that is happening. You may wish to pretend the rich now have all broke their backs to reach this hiatus and therefore now have the duty to watch the "little people" struggle till their death - but I care.

Where there is optimism and people that care there is hope. The people that are pulling their blinders down and pretending that all the people struggling deserve it or are not trying hard enough are not living in the current reality of America.

When I see someone complaining about "not getting a raise in six years" for instance..guess who was president 6 years ago? Come on, reality may be a Be-otch to face, but some os us have the kahoonies to look in square in the eyeballs and see what is really going on. And did I mention, I care!



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
You're right. It'd the government and all those poor people. Another libbot speaks garbage. People start businesses to fulifl perceived needs and hire people to do so. The business comes BEFORE the spending then the spending supports the business. Of course if sales are off you don't expand. Do you want the original jobs to disappear?. If yo have anything other than a tax handout make work "job" ask yourself where it came from.

reply to post by MystikMushroom
 



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
There is a quick and easy fix to this, everyone keeps overlooking and dismissing when it is mentioned.

If a company makes millions or billions of proits a year, their work force should not be at the poverty level and receiving welfare, they should be paying their empllyees better, as they are obviously making plenty of money already.

Not paying their employees nothing, and leaving them to be fed and housed by the tax payers. This is one of the biggest problems, when walmart makes hundreds of billions in profits, and had a majority of their work force qualify for welfare.


On the other hand if Walmart or any other huge retailer or manufacturer did that they wouldn't have the capital to put a store in every major city and town. The share holders would see their investment profits decrease.
Regarding the employees, let's be honest, very few of them are highly skilled or highly educated. Their jobs are easily filled by high school grads without any college. The positions that require a degree or higher job skills pay accordingly.
How much should you have to pay someone to stand at counter and slide items over a scanner? Pretty soon they will go to RFID chips and eliminate the checkers all together.

Walmart could indeed pay more. If they ever get unionized they will no doubt be forced to. Of course the rest of us will all be paying higher prices because of it.

Now it can be argued that we do not need a Walmart in every town and that they hurt small business, but that is another story. As a shareholder I want maximum return for my buck.
edit on 10/18/2012 by Sparky63 because: spelling



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by chameleonwalker
 
so in your oppinion, the workers who actually do all the work and make all the products or do all the services that make the money to begin with don't deserve a fare share of the profits generated by the company?

This is the problem with this country today, I suppose minimum wage is also communist right?

My idea is basically the same, only worker wages are set off of a percentage not a hard dollar amount( which is far more efficient and accurate)

It should be criminal for a corporation the have fulltime workers on welfare, when their owners are making tens of millions, or even billions in profits, why not just have the taxpayers give the rich money in the first place, as this is what we are doing.

The government paying the workers so a company can make profits is communist, not frcing companies to pay an appropriate wage, this is common sense.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by therealdemoboy
reply to post by Tardacus
 


The problem is that there are too many regulations for ANYONE rich or poor to create jobs right now. Between tax penalties, disparities in tariffs, and overall red tape rules and regulations, it's not really "the rich" to blame, per say. It's government's fault.


The real problem is deeper than that and way more basic. The real problem is "We the people". Instead of spending & wasting time in front of the TV it would have been nice if the people were actually trying to get involved in their local politic first to supervise government officials. To play their game you've to either know the rules (their rules) to be able to play and maybe win OR you get involve in politic and you make YOUR OWN rules.

The government is feeding on you like you feed on your garden. They DO NOT care that you've a job or not. They even DO NOT care if you're alive or not. The moment that you stop to be productive for them you're dead meat. They're using the people in millions of different ways and the population have no idea!! The wealth in this country is made by invading other countries to steal resources and creating war. That's it!

In fact the government would rather see a large portion of his population dead right now. Think about it: How much of the actual population of this country benefit the government? It's less than 50%. At the eyes of the government at least 50% is totally useless, has no value at all and are mostly wasting precious resources for the other 50% that produce something. What you do with a tool in your garage that is useless, required too much space, maintenance and break or do not performance very well? You either give it away to someone else or dump it.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


You know I tried to explain to a very small business owner this, and before I tell what she said I want to explain that what is so wrong with the economy can be summed up in her response. And unfortuanately this leaves me to say that this is what happens when very unintelligent people try to run a business. They have no real concept of financial gains/profits/losses.
Her response to me- this is what I said =:" if min wage was really at the level it is designed or sopposed to be designed to be, which is to maintain a minimal living with that pay..then, I state to her, there would be more "free" money to purchase smaller luxories from a wider consumer base" her response- "no, if we paid more to employees I would have to increase my rates to make that money back or go in there and work all these hours myself"

Yes, see, this is the problem on so many levels..wants the "wealth" without the back breaking work, wants to own people or pay them not enough to have a sustained living, and wants to constantly increase her rates of goods. And if you want to argue with what I said here, and state I have it wrong, let me just tell you now, yo uwill argue with a brick wall, because I am not arguing these facts. It is what it is. Some people cannot manage their own pocket book and they want to give answers on what is wrong with our ecomony and then very quickly dismiss all the underdogs of the world into that thought(the one of not good enough to be allowed to have extra money for fun, and never get ahead).
edit on 18-10-2012 by MoEskiMo because: clarify



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


First I'll start off by saying that I don't know how they do it in restaurants, but I do know about construction, and the laws regarding building code and they are set by each individual state. That's not a federal thing. Is the restaurants a federal thing or does it also vary state to state with these regulations?


Those are State, but Federal regulation are also holding down the growth and development of small business. The taxation before the money is even earned by quarterly tax payments on future income causes small business to need large quantities of cash put away and not just the working capital to get started. there is also local regulations and constant growth of those shutting down new business.

So maybe my comment was out of context for this thread but all form of Government is pushing the groth of chains like walmart and stopping cold those who struggle to start new business.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Sparky63
 


I strongle disagree, as the math proves itself reliable. The workers make more, so the spend more on services and goods, so businesses have more money on hand to pay more and higher more people, it is a self fullfilling cycle.

The problem now, is that the cycle is broken, and the rich pay too little to their workers, who now have less money, so purchase less goods, and service, so there are less jobs, so another rouund of less for everyone but the rich ensues.

The system we use now is broken beyond repair, a new better more "worker friendly" system is needed.

The old requires workers to work themselves into the grave for little or no bebfit for the majority, so a few can be richer than any man needs or should be.

My system would allow all to benefit from a companies successes, and would remove the need for welfare, and other handout programs, as every worker would be able to pay the bills, as long as they put in the work to make their company successful, instead of companies working people to death, leaving them starving for the government to subsudise.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


They have to follow local, state, and federal rules. Oftentimes the rules conflict. You simply have no idea the hoops people must jump through to start a business. It is nearly impossible in states like California anymore.


So true! just try getting a license to add cocktails at a restaurant in Ca. The cost of competing is ridiculous!

In oregon, can you believe that if a person comes in the restaurant and buys dinner and a beer and is intoxicated, whether you can tell or not, if he leaves and hurts himself or someone else the SERVER is responsible and the restaurant is also for his actions. EVEN if he goes somewhere else and drinks more...how does that make sense?

When I took the three hour servers test as a waitress I was stunned. It becomes your job to decide if someone has been drinking and not to give them the only things we serve not hard liquire but beer or wine.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by LanceCorvette
You ever get a job from a poor person?

Yep, thought so.


I was a "poor person" and I built my business myself, with zero tax breaks or help from anyone. The idea that only rich billionaires create jobs is complete BS able to be debunked by any statistics from any country. Please try harder.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus



I started my business with £50.
reply to post by detachedindividual
 

There-in lies the rub. There is no way that you could start a successful business in the US with $80 or so US dollars, unless you are insane. The liability insurance alone, would run into the thousands of dollars every year, and incorporating, taxes, record-keeping alone would double that, as recurring expenses. I did successfully start and run a business, and I did it right, by the book, and all I can say to you is "No way in the US could you do that, and sleep at night".



I left my employment and bought a website. The cost of building the website myself, the domain, the hosting, was less than £50. Within one week I had three clients. I now have 50.

I do not buy any stock, I do not pay any wages but my own. I provide a unique service to other webmasters.

The concept that it is "impossible" is a myth, clearly.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Trickle-down story: As a kid I sold vinyl bumperstickers at Dead shows designed using legal, non copyrighted materials. First batch cost us $100 for 400 stickers, we sold them on our own for a buck a piece and made a tidy profit very quickly. Next batch (because the sticker was selling well) we bumped it up to 1000 for $200 and I had a couple of younger guys offer to buy 100 for $50 so they could go out and sell them. Totally did that and still sold lots for a buck.

Next year it was $1000 for 10,000 stickers (template, set up cost/labor materials get cheaper the more you buy...). We even got permits for some of the East Coast cities (Usually a phone call and about $30 at City Hall-same as the fine if you ain't got a permit...) Typical pyramid sales concept that paid for lots of tickets, hotels and amenities. Cash, cash, cash. Everybody wins.

Idea-follow-through-DEMAND=profit=jobs=spending

Life was so simple then... Where did we go wrong...



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by chameleonwalker
 
so in your oppinion, the workers who actually do all the work and make all the products or do all the services that make the money to begin with don't deserve a fare share of the profits generated by the company?


You'll give bonus to key employees of your business as incentive. Most jobs in this country do not require education at all I mean literally. They'll occupy a minimum wage position that can be done by ANYONE on the street.

In big business the people on top DO NOT CARE about those people at the bottom. They're expandable and replaceable. Few years ago the Apple factory in China installed anti-suicide nets all around their buildings to prevent the workers to jump off and kill themselves. Those safety net were not installed for the safety of the employees but to make sure that the company won't lose people on the production line and profit at the end. They'll replace every single one that do not fit their requirement or rules without any problems or concerns.

You want to be treated right and get a good wage then learn some skills that nobody can do and now you'll have more chance to get some bonus. Carve yourself with skills in a way that you'll become indispensable and rare to find.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by Sparky63
 


I strongle disagree, as the math proves itself reliable. The workers make more, so the spend more on services and goods, so businesses have more money on hand to pay more and higher more people, it is a self fullfilling cycle.

The problem now, is that the cycle is broken, and the rich pay too little to their workers, who now have less money, so purchase less goods, and service, so there are less jobs, so another rouund of less for everyone but the rich ensues.

The system we use now is broken beyond repair, a new better more "worker friendly" system is needed.

The old requires workers to work themselves into the grave for little or no bebfit for the majority, so a few can be richer than any man needs or should be.

My system would allow all to benefit from a companies successes, and would remove the need for welfare, and other handout programs, as every worker would be able to pay the bills, as long as they put in the work to make their company successful, instead of companies working people to death, leaving them starving for the government to subsudise.


I have a woman who sits on her behind all day answering the phones. I could just as easily get a machine to do that for me and than I wouldn't have to pay her at all. No one can tell me how much she is worth to me or my company and then arbitrarily decide how much I need to pay her. Should I have to pay her a wage that puts her above the poverty level? Why is that my responsibility? If I had to do that to all my employees I would have to shut the doors or relocate overseas. Then I would have 250 people out of work. I didn't work 70 hours a week for 15 years to give someone else a pleasant existence. When she works as hard as I did and makes the sacrifices I did, then she can demand a higher wage. Her income combined with her spouses puts her above the poverty level by the way.

I understand your point and appreciate your detailed explanation. I don't believe the results would truly be beneficial in the long run.
edit on 10/18/2012 by Sparky63 because: spelling



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by nomadone407
 


I've played around with the kickstarter idea. What is stopping me is finding the time to dedicate to it whilst working a full time job. In this economy, I can't afford to quit my job and hope to raise enough money to get the idea off the ground. That's the honest truth!



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 

My husbands family owns a restaurant in Oregon, at the Ca border.

The California state inspector came in.


Maybe I'm missing something but what the heck is a CA inspector even doing in OR?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Why do people feel entitled to anything they didn't earn?

Many "wealthy" people started out working long hours with great risk to their financial security for years.


No they didn't. Most of them inherited their money.

Why do they feel entitled to money THEY didn't earn?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Also, I don't know where this idea that" only college educated people are skilled enough to deserve good pay" comes from. It is however dead wrong.

I have known many college grads that make 6figure incomes because of their degrees, that are not smart enough to manage a gas station. Yet the gas station manger is making maybe $35,000 a year if that.

My grabd father build parts for the laser reflector placed on the moon during the apollo missions, he never even finished elementary school, there are a great many very talented people out here in the "real world" that cannot afford to go to college, yet many who do get a degree, that can't even figure out how to change oil or brakes on a car( a trained monkey can do either).

This is all bulls**t, most will never be able to afford college, and many who can still end up not finding even $15 an hour jobs, with no hope of ever paying off their loans.

Come on people, we just need an entirely new system, one where school is free, one where workers should get, and do deserve to make a much higher percentage olf the profits acquired off the sweat from their backs.

This is simple common sense, not rocket science, none of this is even that hard to understand.

If clooege degrees are the only measure of "talent" then it should be free, so that "talent" is determined by the ability of the individual, not the financial positin of their parents.



new topics




 
60
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join