Welcome to PatsFans.com

Wealthy American Admits the Wealthy Don't Create Jobs

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatriotsReign, Dec 16, 2011.

  1. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,844
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +188 / 3 / -10

    Gee, really? As if we didn't already know this.

    Finally, A Rich American Destroys The Fiction That Rich People Create The Jobs

    "The company's customers buy the company's products, which, in turn, creates the need for the employees to produce, sell, and service those products. If those customers go broke, the demand for the company's products will collapse. And the jobs will disappear, regardless of what the entrepreneur does."

    So, in a nutshell, you mean it's CONSUMER DEMAND that creates jobs? No way!

    Finally, A Rich American Destroys The Fiction That Rich People Create The Jobs | Daily Ticker - Yahoo! Finance
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,815
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +303 / 4 / -2

    I think things are a little more comprehensive PR. Clearly consumers are the driver. Without consumers there isn't any demand, and while I'm always wary of the political lines of "fair share" or "rich people create jobs", the article ignores the point of investment. It's people with money, or institutions with money, that invest in companies. My point is that it's never as simple as "fair share" or "rich people create jobs". It's much more comprehensive than that.

    Ok maybe two points.

    We all know I think cap gains should be raised, so I'm not in any way a lackey for the "rich". The above, which granted can be taken to be a mere point of spending, ignores the fact that this $9 million is his (the earners), and leads to spending in places where 9 million people earning $1,000 wouldn't. Be it by purchasing that plane he mentions, or by investing it, even in a bank, which then turns around and loans it to people who expand growing businesses. Obviously there needs to be a certain balance put in place, but the notion that "rich people do/don't create jobs" is disengenuous when used by either party. They infact do, but simply as a piece to a much larger puzzle.
  3. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

  4. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,815
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +303 / 4 / -2

    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,625
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +126 / 7 / -13

  6. Gainzo

    Gainzo Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Or it is a clown like Bernie Marcus fueling the GOP fire by saying things like this:

    Home Depot Founder: I Couldn't Start Home Depot Under President Obama - Home Depot - Fox Nation

    Home Depot was founded in 1978. How were the economic conditions back then Bernie?
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,844
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +188 / 3 / -10

    All solid and valid points and I agree with all of them...damn it!

    So it's really a 2-way isn't it? We need people investing and expanding in order to create jobs and we need consumer's disposable income to be increasing so that demand increases...got it.

    So how do you get overall consumer spending to increase so investors will expand?

    Consumers need to cut back on spending to de-leverage from debt. Which means that we won't see expansion for a while.
  8. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,844
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +188 / 3 / -10

    Times were just beginning to get bad in '78...but they never got close to being as bad as economic conditions are now.

    If Bernie said that because he supports the GOP, he's an idiot. But I don't know what his motive was.
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,625
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +126 / 7 / -13

    The business started quoted in the OP article started an internet website which is not capital intensive in many situations your need the capital to create the products and services to fulfill customer/market demands.

    You can't treat it in a vacuum.
  10. Gainzo

    Gainzo Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Bernie has been *****ing about this since Obama was elected. I really don't know what his problem is as I can't think of any regulations that would effect Home Depot. They are a retailer.

    Apart from lumber, plants, and some bathroom fixtures, most of the stuff they sell is imported.

    I was 6 in 1978 so I will defer to you when it comes to the economic climate back then but I will say that taxes were much higher back in those days.
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,815
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +303 / 4 / -2

    IMO, the entity that removes the most money from the pockets of consumers (and the middle class), is the government. So the sooner we can get government spending under control, and thus the costs of it doing business softened from the pockets of middle class taxpayers, the better. So spending is #1 in my opinion. The second part of the equation would be a restructuring, or tinkering of the tax code. Whichever terminology you prefer. I'd keep income rates more or less the same, but would raise cap gains, and lower corporate. CG would be two tiered. Lower tier aimed at saving middle to lower income investors a few bucks, by charging a lower 20% rate on the first $X dollars of investment income, and then a 25% rate on anything beyond that. The lower tier would be something in the $10k to $50k range. Someone with a better knowledge of where middle income investors sit would be able to determine that. The key is, the lower tier is aimed solely at helping working class people. Since I hate paragraphs as I've been told, I'll continue by adding that the tax tweaking would primarily deal with deductions and loopholes. To me, a 20, 30, 40% rate is meaningless if everyone is writing off half of their burden. I'd like to see deductions and shelters removed to the point where our tax rates are flatter, and more representative of the rates being applied. When someone like Buffet earns $65 million of taxable income, but deducts $23 million off the top of that, somethings not right. I think most people would agree. What good is a rate if very few people come close to paying it?

    I think reducing spending, raising cap gains, tweaking the rates for middle income earners, and eliminating a lot of deductions would serve to reduce the deficit from both ends (cut spending and increase revenues), among other things.

    There are other things that can be done, like moving toward energy independence and sealing the border, which would each serve American interests financially, but I'll save that for a different thread.
  12. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,844
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +188 / 3 / -10

    So would you like to see personal deductions limitted or do you support deductions for the number of dependents per household?

    What about mortgage interest deductions? I think it would be a difficult time to eliminate that one because we NEED home sales to come back asap if we ever want our economy to get back on track. I'd say home sales is THE #1 priority for our economy. Either that or home values will decline further if we eliminate it...and that's exactly what we don't need.
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2011
  13. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,113
    Likes Received:
    217
    Ratings:
    +328 / 6 / -8

    Went out after work to toast a guy who's retiring at age 69 last night. Got in a great conversation w/his daughter's fiance -- they're from down south, and she gave me this long tea-party rap last time I saw them about a year ago.

    Long story short, they've got a business they've been building, he drives a jag, blah blah blah. He starts telling me businesses are in terrible trouble because regulations are so crazy and nobody knows what to expect from the tax code and the like...

    But in the same breath he was telling me how his business was expanding, how he gets around "some" of the terrible regs because he hires illegals (!), etc. I did give him some sh1t about that part, then he gave me some sh1t about being high and mighty and living off his taxes (which were evidently a crushing burden, after the Jag payment is made and all...)

    Nice guy by the way, really reminded me of Ron White, the comic. But while we disagreed on a lot of stuff, we both agreed that the very rich have trillions on the sidelines not being invested, and that demand has to come back. Oh but meanwhile he hates the debt and "money in people's pockets" sounds socialist, which he of course abhors.

    He also waxed eloquent about how we're like Rome, and Rome fell. I told him my viewpoint is there's one big difference: Rome fell in the past. The U.S. is still in the present. Our choices pretty much determine what will become of the U.S.

    Interestingly the conversation started with a discussion of the Occupy guys a couple blocks away from my workplace... and went from there.

    When we stayed out of the weeds -- and we mainly did -- the broad brush reality actually seems much more uniting than polarizing.

    But as we know here, and as he and I obviously know, the devil's in the details.
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2011
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,815
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +303 / 4 / -2

    Which deductions get axed, or remain, is up for debate. Personally I'd like to see the mortgage deduction, charity, and dependents survive in some capcity. The reason being is we'd like to see home ownership remain strong, since homer owners are usually more invested in community, and pay property taxes that go straight into the coffers of the local government. How much of a deduction could be discussed, but I'd like to see it remain in some form. The other two as well for similar reasons. Charities are more efficient than government hand outs, and allowing deductions for dependents helps families. I'd be open to all ideas and positions on these, but they are the 3 that I think most people would agree to keep to some extent. Especially since these deductions tend to help the people who could use it most.

    The devils always in the details. He reminds me of a couple I had dinner with while visiting my parents in Florida last year. The couple was from Conneticutt, and the dude of the duo went into a complete rail of his tea party neighbor and their cause. He want on to talk about how Obama has the tea party where he wants them, and how the poor are yada, yada, yada. Then a glass of wine later, he goes into how he and his wife are trying to set up residency in Florida so that they can save a bundle on their taxes. Going so far as to detail what the rules were, and how he and his wife were only using cash for 6 months plus a day so that there wouldn't be any electronic records of where they were or spent. I so wanted to point out his complete hypocracy, but I didn't want to look impolite. I just laughed inside at how ignorant some people are.

    That guy is a tool for hiring illegals. He must have one of those businesses where "americans" won't work. Meanwhile, what's his hiring illegals do to the wages of peer workers, or to the balance sheet of the social service budget associated with each citizen. That guy is part of the problem, yet he thinks he isn't. I can't stand that.

    Who cares if they drive a jag? Does that make them bad people? Business owners assume tons of risk, and when successful buying a nice car is part of the reward. Business owners don't show up to work in the morning and ask a boss "What do you want me to do today?". They're the ones that get asked that question, and who need to have an answer as well. Furthermore, sometimes people buy things when times are good, and are stuck with them when things turn bad. I'm sure there are countless other people, even layman, who bought a car or home in part on credit, who either saw their business revenues decline, their salary at work get cut, or their posiiton outright terminated. When that happens you're still stuck with you car or home, and the money you owe. So while someone might drive a nice car, or live in a nice home, it's not always indicitive of what their actual financial situation is. Sometimes it's just indicitive of where it used to be. I'm not saying that's the case with the person you met. Just that such is always a posibility. Of course, the whole "eh, they drive a X" thing always gives me a chuckle. As if people have any clue what it took to reach the point where that person could afford to drive one.
  15. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,113
    Likes Received:
    217
    Ratings:
    +328 / 6 / -8

    No, you're not bad if you drive a jag, just because you drive a jag.

    However, they're expanding, and times are good for them. That's why he has the jag.

    At the same time, he's making sure that times are good by (as you say) damaging the rest of us just a little bit, in the way he breaks the rules. Sort of similar with your guy from CT.

    I don't dislike people for getting theirs. It's when they're hurting the rest of us somehow, and it's sort of "wink wink everybody does it" when they tell you about it.

    I was polite about it and even though it was a political conversation I didn't call him out and point fingers. We had an enjoyable drink or two after work, and that was that.

    PS, it's not the kind of work you can't find an American to do, assembly of manufactured goods.
  16. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,844
    Likes Received:
    84
    Ratings:
    +188 / 3 / -10

    Why don't you "blow the whistle" on the guy? He deserves it...

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>