No Mr. Romney, Rich People Do Not Create Jobs

page: 3
60
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo

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.

If the wealthy don't create jobs, I'm guessing that the answer would be government, yes?

If that's the case, then embrace big government. I, for one, will be working to make government accountable AND SMALLER.

Personal responsibility. Embrace it.


I think if we take away the ideologies and just look at "trickle down economics" objectively as a business model, you'll see what was being said. "Rich guy bad" vs "rich guy job creator", "poor people victim" vs "poor people are entitled", ect is fun for drunken conversations in bars (with a first aid kit nearby). If we ignore the "class war" debate and treat it as a non-social issue, things look a little different.

The problem as stated is that you can not trickle down from the top because there will be nobody to invest into their expanding business. By investors, I mean consumers. You would need to expand the consumer base and that would naturally grow business. Trickle down was sort of how we bailed out the banks. It was stupid. Why not give the home owners the money so they could pay the bank and then they would be saved naturally and the people wouldn't lose their homes. Again, stupid.

It just seems like the default solution would be to create more customers first, then let the businesses create jobs.


You can't just "give" homeowners a push/help with owning a hoime if they can't keep up with a mortgage.

It's the last payment as important as the first that is crucial.




posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Razimus
 


Please read the article in my OP. It explains that these men didn't create jobs -- the healthy economy they built their company in created the jobs.

If no one has any money, no one can buy the new Windows or an iPad.

The article also reminds us that Henry Ford paid his production line workers enough money so that they were able to afford his cars. He knew that they would become customers, and without customers he wouldn't have a company.

Edit to add:
It's a cyclical system. Money must flow into the middle/lower classes in order for the rich to main their wealth.
edit on 17-10-2012 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 



I'm almost 50. And in those years, my wife's cousin has never worked. Has always had a better house, tv, food than my family. I'm an officer. And yet, there have been times that I skipped meals so my kids could eat.

My main point is to never rely on anyone but yourself. The government can and will betray you.

Corporations wil look at the bottom line before they look at you.

You have to rely on yourself, if you want to succeed.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

You can't just "give" homeowners a push/help with owning a hoime if they can't keep up with a mortgage.

It's the last payment as important as the first that is crucial.


I didn't mean for us to get stuck on the home bail-out thing and I shouldn't have brought it up but it just suddenly reminded me of the trickle-down theory.

What I meant by giving the bail-out money to the people is that the people in the homes would give it directly to the banks. Therefore whatever money we gave the banks (that the US citizens paid for) would have been applied toward the principle of the mortgages. It wouldn't have saved all the home owners but it would have made a big difference in the lives of many people.

Instead, we gave the banks a big fat welfare check and then they still got payments from home owners and then they still kept the houses that were foreclosed on. They got their cake, looked at it, sold it, stole it back, chewed it up, spit it out, ate it again, and then got more cake from the guys the just stole it from.

Sorry, just a rant. It vaguely relates to the subject but not enough for me to keep going.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


A personal revelation.

My wife (an RN) and I talked about the next few years. I work and pay rent on an apartment/rental. In three years, we take her paychecks and pay for a house with cash! We avoid mortgages, intrest issues.

It takes work, sacrifice, honest labour, but it can be done, my friend.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


your title is misleading, when you don't have facts to back up your bogus rhetoric you lean on twisting facts, ask the late Henry Ford if he didn't create jobs, oh you don't have to ask him just take a look at the current Ford Motor Company, 213,000, en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Cuervo
 


A personal revelation.

My wife (an RN) and I talked about the next few years. I work and pay rent on an apartment/rental. In three years, we take her paychecks and pay for a house with cash! We avoid mortgages, intrest issues.

It takes work, sacrifice, honest labour, but it can be done, my friend.



At the risk of being even more off-topic, I have congratulate you. That is the only smart way to do it. The problem is getting ahead enough to do it which is why they can convince people that they "need" loans.

Your other advantage is you can avoid the whole "one sickness or injury and you're homeless" situation that many Americans are in because you are married to an RN. That's sort of like cheating.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Razimus
 


You speak as if your age is the equivalent of your avatar. Henry Ford DID create jobs but he also said that he would pay his workers enough to be able to buy the product he was making. In your zeal to blather about your "money Gods"...you missed what the other poster was trying to say.



My personal political philosophy is about freedom, self reliance and hard work. I will, however, call out either side of the money lovers and haters when they are being ridiculous.

If your life is all about having/worshiping money....or envying those that do have money...you really need to get a grip. This country was founded on the ideal of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness". If your happiness is contingent on "stuff"...aka...material wealth and possessions...I have bad news for you...happiness will run from you and avoid you your entire life. You will have buckets of money and there will still be something missing...I guarantee it.

The wealthy are entitled to what they have...it's my job to figure out ways to get them to "want" to give it to me for products or services.

edit on 10/17/2012 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)
edit on 10/17/2012 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo


Your other advantage is you can avoid the whole "one sickness or injury and you're homeless" situation that many Americans are in because you are married to an RN. That's sort of like cheating.


Any time anyone can "cheat" the system, then it should be counted as a win!



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Nothing against hard work and self reliance. All for it. But I think we are missing the point. The OP was how the economy generates and circulates "wealth". I suppose how that is defined can be argued but I am not stepping into that mess.

However, we need to understand our economy does not reward anyone simply on hard work alone. No one gets ahead on being smart. That is a fallacy. Lots of people work hard. Lots of people put in long hours and are thrifty with their 'money'. There are a lot of smart people out there. It's not good enough. Never has been.

No one has ever built a fortune all on their own. Total delusion. Only if a person was spawned on a barren planet and single handedly crafted a civilization out of dirt could they claim this. Never happened. What we have was built on the backs of millions of humans long dead. We all live in an interdependent web of those around us. Matter of fact, economic models depends on it. The whole concept of wealth as we understand it, requires it.

If you happen to be lucky enough to be born at the right time and right place - with your particular talents deemed valuable to everyone- AND some hard work and luck, then you stand a chance of being wealthy. Hard work and smarts are part of equation but they cannot stand on their own.

Call it communism, socialism, free market capitalism, Satanism, or whatever. Your success depends in large part on those around you. Always has been.

So when one portion of society decides to drink the Kool-Aid, delude themselves into believing they are somehow a direct result of social Darwinism, and think they are doing "God's Work" by being parasitic to the system that spawned them, everyone suffers. That is where we are today.

You sound like a person who takes great pride in their achievements. I salute you. We need more people like that. However, how do you think your efforts would have been rewarded in a system with a lot less cronyism, a stock market not manipulated for those in the know, or a government not owned by corporations that don't give a damn about you and your family? That ain't Communism or Socialism. That is still the Free Market.
edit on 17-10-2012 by ABNARTY because: sp/gr



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ABNARTY
 


Such a defeatist attitude! Anyone can succeed. It is not a falicy, it is not something you need the government to help you with.

People can do it, people DO do it, every day!



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 



I'm almost 50. And in those years, my wife's cousin has never worked. Has always had a better house, tv, food than my family. I'm an officer. And yet, there have been times that I skipped meals so my kids could eat.

My main point is to never rely on anyone but yourself. The government can and will betray you.

Corporations wil look at the bottom line before they look at you.

You have to rely on yourself, if you want to succeed.


Star to you good sir!

And congrats on being a CO. My girlfriend's brother just graduated and is going to be a JAG Officer. We're all very proud!

As an Eagle Scout I can attest to self reliance. People think I am insane when keep gloves, hat, boots, sand, a shovel, jumper cables and whatnot in my car. Be prepared I tell them. I'd rather not ever need to use that stuff, but at least I have it when I need it. I too don't "expect" anyone to take care of, or help me. There are times, however, when I have needed help and was grateful for the support network and family I have.

I agree 100% with you on corporations. They exist to make money, peroid. Anyone who thinks a company cares about them is sadly mistaken.

I have heard mystical rumors that once upon a time there existed a place where companies viewed their employees as assets and valued them. Today, unfortunatley, the working class are about as expendable and replacable as a cheap toothbrush.


We need sollutions, not fighting over who's side can slam the other harder. We need ideas, innovations and sollutions that really create the kind of change we can all agree on. Ultimatley, I think we can all agree changes need to be made, the current way of doing things isn't working.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I see what you're saying. The banks basically got "double dipped".

Flipping that around and playing devil's advocate, how could we be assured that the people would give that money to the banks?

I like the idea, I just am not sold on how it would be implemented. I know "Trailer Joe" that owes 30k on his mobile home might just decide to keep that money for beer and cigarettes.

People have to be proactive. It's not enough for the government to adjust taxes and cut/create programs. The people themselves that live here have to wake up and realize that their current level of spending is not compatible with the economic reality. We ALL have to make our own cuts, prioritize our spending, seek education (and ways to afford it).

We need to increase the quality of the people here in the USA if we ever want to compete globally, and ultimatley I suppose that does come down the individual. If I know the government is working hard to turn things around for me, I'll do my part and work hard on my end too.

That should be the mentality of Americans in my opinion.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


People relying on government are setting themselves up for what the government dictates, is okay for them.

People relying on corporations are setting themselves up for what corporations dictate is okay for them.

People who rely on themselves, and personally dictate what they want and need and direct their actions to satisfy what their needs are; are the antithesis to government and corporation alike.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Who said anything about the government?

This is not defeatist. This a reality.

People do succeed everyday. Good stuff too. But those people are not alone on a deserted island. They are surrounded by everyone on the planet. One can accept that or ignore it. It doesn't change it.

Most people work hard. You and I probably work just as hard as let's say some investment banker. Just because he/she makes more money than you or I, or can provide more for his/her family, does that mean he/she is inherently more valuable than you or I? No way. Just right time/place/skills/luck. It all ain't fair nor will it ever be. This is planet Earth. Who cares?

BUT if he/she starts to stagnate the system we all share for their benefit alone to the detriment of all others, what do you think a concerned person's response should be? I would hope to call him or her out. That is not defeatism. That is the antithesis. That is taking the offensive.
edit on 17-10-2012 by ABNARTY because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Red Cloak
They call it trickle down economics because it means that the rich are pissing on everyone else.
By your logic, the POTUS version would be a sprinkler economics as everyone has the same right and thus they all be pissing on each other and collectively work towards a common goal?



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
This is kind of like the proverbial economic question..."Which came first? The chicken or the egg?"

The big problem with wealth, corporations, and jobs going over seas is two fold:

A- Ethics and morals in being wealthy and successful.

B- Over regulation by the government.

There used to be a time when a successful company in America shared it's success with it's workers. Especially after WWII. A person could go to work with a big company and, if they performed, could count on retiring with that company. They could also count on being valued as a "comapny person" with great benefits, retirement, health, stocks, etc.

Now a days, it is all very "mercinary." Companies have no loyalty to their workers and workers likewise hold no loyalty to them. As the demands for ever increasing profits kicked in, where do they come from?

Higher prices on the shelf and market? More efficient operations? Usually, it was a reduction in worker benefits and compensation. We see the reduction in avg. house hold income and wages. We see the influx of immigrants... legal and illegal... into the work place at a significantly reduced pay rate, which inturn undermines pay across the entire industries. We see companies switching to "temporary" workers. And then to just shipping jobs overseas... for even lower wages.

The problem with this is they are gutting the consumer market of disposable income and then seem perplexed that we have no means to buy the imported products that we used to make. Kind of like a cannibal that eats his own legs and then seems suprised that he can't walk.

Greed and selfishness.... poor morals and ethics in business ownership and success.

Secondly, over regulation by the government. Why would someone want to start or keep a business here when there are impact studies, temporary fees and applications for use... no guarantee that they will be approved and no refund on application fee even if not approved. Then there are EPA studies, Dept of Labor, OSHA, Haz-Mat, property taxes, rules and fees and taxes and regulations at the local, state, federal level.

And when you open up and succeed, there are taxes upon taxes, more regulation mandates... it never ends. That is the USA.

Now, if I want to open a manufacturing plant in Bangladesh... I have cheap labor with little government oversight, few EPA rules and oversight, cheap materials, and then a government that gladly lets me run my business because they get their cut and taxes for their country... basically legislated government bribes in the form of laws.

We have pretty much run business and corporations away from America. A smaller version is in the migration of businesses from say... New York or the North East to North Carolina and the South. People and businesses are leaving NY, California, and the like in droves for lower taxes, lower regulations, a lower cost of living, lower wages, less Union influence...

As for wealth, the individual creates their own wealth. Surely there are those that were born into money. However, there are many more that create their own standard of living.

There was a time when everyone wanted to be rich and successful. The definitions vary from person to person, but for the most part... we all have a vision of what success looks like. That usually includes more money and material possessions and a satisfaction of having done it yourself... overcoming the odds.

How was this to happen? Education... real life as well as school, hard work, sacrifice, literally counting pennies and watching expenses, rising early before the sun came up and generally working past the setting of sun. Realizing that the return on these investments will be years in the making.

You can read biographies of heroes and great Americans... in society, business, military, entertainment... they really did all of the above. Lee Iaccoca, Henry Ford, Steve Jobs, George Patton, ...

Today I worked 10 hours managing a store for a farm supply company, then I came home and cut firewood for delivery tommorrow. Tommorrow I will get up about 430am, be outside and feed the farm animals about 6am, capture 2 goats I will deliver at 730am, return home at 830am with more money in my pocket, load the firewood on my truck, deliver that and make more money, then be at my regular job at 11am and get off tommorrow night about 9pm.

My wife and I also have a farmstand that we open and sell mostly stuff we grow... this fall it's been tomatoes, pumpkins, mums, and apples... straw and hay bales. We opened this up in September, but had been planning and planting, and building it since June. We are amazed at the sales we have out in the middle of no where but we have done a good job of promoting, road signage, and word of mouth.

We are on the road to success through the sacrifices described above. A few years from now, I will not tolerate someone telling me I should be ashamed to be successful. And yes, we did build that.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Here is a big picture view of how things work. I think a simplified explanation of the term "carried interest" is in order. So here goes: When a person (founder) has a great idea and decides to start a company, he will often go to a private equity firm for financial backing. The PE firm will pledge money from investor funds to finance the start up and operations of the company, but only if it is accompanied by funding from the founder as well.

So every time the PE firm releases a tranche of money to the company, the founder has to write a check as well...risking his personal wealth. For many founders, it's a SIGNIFICANT risk with a large portion of their savings or assets put on the line. It's called 'putting a skin in the game'.

The return on investment for these sort of companies, if there is one, is not recognized until the company becomes profitable and is sold. One part of the ROI is called carried interest and it is usually only paid out to founders and fund managers after all the PE investors have received their share of profit off the top which is as it should be.

This carried interest receives a favorable capital gains tax rate. Why? Because these sort of companies CREATE JOBS and economic growth. And people with great ideas need incentives to put their own wealth on the line to HELP create these jobs and economic growth.

So in light of all the screaming about people needing to pay their "fair share," the incentive is the favorable tax rate. Take away the incentive? Well...doesn't seem like a good idea does it?



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
So the OP is saying that Reagan's policies didn't work because he spent 6 hours on the internet and found sites that said they didn't work? lord...

How about looking at what Carter did (Obama makes Carter look like a genius by the way) to the country and what Reagan did to turn Carter's near disaster around.?



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I find your perspective completely ignorant of the true nature of money.

the majority of people who are actually wealthy (and remain wealthy in their progeny), have acquired it by making an abuse of the monetary system.

so, I claim, unapologetically, that I AM IN FACT ENTITLED to a healthy monetary (and thus economic) policy. we do not have a choice: we are forced by fiat to share the money system. money is INHERENTLY socialist concept.

I like to compare it to driving and rude drivers. there are those people out there that seem to think that if they can figure out how to game the road conditions (such as cutting other drivers off), then their gain is THEIRS. no. it isn't. because I am the good natured Guy who must deal with the cascade of brake lights resulting from your behavior. and the rude turd up there is putting ALL of our lives at risk.

truly wealthy people get rich by the same technique. they game the system (are you aware of how a "trust" works?) by electing presidents that help their game. and they (and people suchas yourself) s3em to thin that their gain is THEIRS. no. it isn't. because I am the good natured guy who who must deal with the cascade .....


think this isn't true? money is FIAT for a reason.

personal responsibility has no bearing in a system which is, by nature, shared. just as the road must be shared, wealth must also be shared.





top topics
 
60
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join