Even if the Republicans only cared about the rich [Please...], we need them!

There's the source of most atrocities and violation of liberties - asking how others can serve your ends.

I have some time for left anarchists/purists - they disagree with me over the allocation of resources, fair enough, to each their own. But the Fabian movement I absolutely cannot stand in any capacity. Rather than changing the system to suit their preferences, they maintain the current system of pseudo-fascist collusion between government and business, and use society-wide theft orchestrated by the state to mold the society they want.

 

And do they stay in business if the money going out is more than coming in and if all business operated that way what would happen to the economy?

 

Maybe in imagination land but in reality the people I work for work extremely hard and deserve everything they worked hard for. Many rich people start companies that employ many people. Do you need another reason of what rich people do because we can add up the charity aspect as well.

 

Lets do math, tell us, did Bill Gates hire more people as his company gained wealth or less?

 

That's a new question with an obvious answer. You said "I have never met or heard of a poor person who created a job and hired somebody." I simply told you about a guy named Bill, who did.



​

 

Many do and it would most likely grow.

Every dollar in revenue you take in is proof of a dollars worth of value you put into the economy, growing the economy. Furthermore, even if you spent 100% of those dollars on your operating costs (which would likely include the salaries of employees) — you still grew the economy.

And more, despite what most liberals seem to believe, business isn't a zero sum game. It's not always about spending less than you get folks to pay, it's more often about building value.

If you took in $100,000 dollars this year and borrowed $10,000 to spend $110,000 but developed a new drug, great software, a better battery, or exciting service while you did it — you might be able to take in $1,000,000 next year. Possibly spending $1,000,001 to do it (folks would line up to loan you that extra dollar even though your company still hadn't shown a profit).

You could, and many businesses do, go on for decades operating at a loss while running a fantastically successful company that grows the economy.





​

 

I said:

1. I have never met or heard of a poor person who created a job and hired somebody.

2. There is no way that I know of to grow an economy that prevents the rich guys from getting most of the new wealth. If they don't put up the capital investments then there will be no new businesses or expansions of existing businesses. You don't have to like it, hell even I don't like it, but that's the reality of the situation.

3. Higher taxes and more regulations are a recipe for a stagnant economy. If the business climate sucks then why is anybody surprised when the economy doesn't flourish?

There's no way around it - you gotta have sufficient capital to start a business. If you ain't rich then you have to get people with money to invest in your enterprise, and/or to back you for a business loan. And I know that many on the left do not appreciate the fact that in most cases an investor does not invest their money unless they believe the rewards outweigh the risks, but that is the truth. Higher taxes and more regulations WILL increase the risks involved and lower the expected rewards (profit margin), and that too is the truth. So, if the US does not change the business climate in this country to be more competitive then our economy will continue to struggle. Because the American and foreign investors will put their money to use in other countries, simple as that.

 

and I said: "Steve Jobs, Larry Page, Bill Gates... a lot of entrepreneurs started with small or negative net worth."

Some folks started a company writing code in a motel or dorm room and created jobs where folks got paid from the revenue of licensing the code. Million dollar companies have been started with $10,000 borrowed against a credit card or less.

You have some valid points, but folks — on the right or the left — aren't going to bother to read down to them if you start with a blatantly false assertion. Assertions that are not necessary to make your point. Of course folks with little or negative net worth have created businesses. And still are. That doesn't mean our tax and business policies aren't a problem.

America needs to promote business development, Obama realizes that. It's why he asked Steve Jobs what he could do to bring Apple's manufacturing back to the U.S. The costs we've piled on U.S. businesses to pad a minimum lifestyle that we can't afford are making us less competitive each year. Which is why Steve told Obama "those jobs aren't coming back."

And we're also not the best market for businesses to target their products anymore. As of 2012 we are no longer the worlds first economy. GM's twenty year plan for recovery was aimed 90% at the emerging Chinese middle class. FaceBook is now prioritizing Europe. It's not just better to make stuff outside the U.S., it's also increasingly better to serve outside markets.

Those are the problems. No one is sure what the solution is. It could be robotics, 3D printing, genomics... or an entirely new industry we haven't even thought of yet. There are a lot of ways America could try and get competitive again. No one's sure what the winning plan is.

But the one thing that is sure is continuing with tax and business policies that drive opportunities to other nations ain't gonna make it easier. People need to tighten their belts, we need to stop moaning about what we're entitled to, and get serious about business.




​

 

" Some folks started a company writing code in a motel or dorm room and created jobs where folks got paid from the revenue of licensing the code. Million dollar companies have been started with $10,000 borrowed against a credit card or less.

You have some valid points, but folks — on the right or the left — aren't going to bother to read down to them if you start with a blatantly false assertion. Assertions that are not necessary to make your point. Of course folks with little or negative net worth have created businesses. And still are. That doesn't mean our tax and business policies aren't a problem. "


You say it's a blatently false assertion, I say 99% of the time it is not. You have to have people investing lots of money to start a business, which is my point relative to this thread. If you're going to screw over the rich and wealthy then you have to be prepared to live with whatever the consequences are. I do not know how Twitter and Facebook and some of those companies got their start, maybe internet companies do not require as much up front capital as an ordinary company or business does. But I'd be willing to wager that most of 'em require enough money to get going and become profitable. Jobs, Page, Gates, and whoever the entrepeneurs are today may have the world's greatest idea, but it takes money to make it work.

I'll be honest about it, as a fiscal conservative I only want to implement programs and policies that work to everyone's advantage. If that means rich guys get richer so that everyone else is a little bit better off, then I call that a win-win. I hold no brief for the rich guys, but they are necessary if you're going to startup new businesses and grow the economy. And their take if you will of the profits has to be enough to make the investment worthwhile, otherwise their money goes elsewhere, maybe offshore or into other assets that aren't as beneficial for jobs. People on the left can complain all they want, but that's the way it is.

 

so you brought up Gates but refuse to converse any further on him when you know you cant answer honestly.

 

The point is, why complain about the inequality of taxes if you don't care about social inequality.

 

Whom did Bill hire?

We are not arguing over people who hire 1 or 2 people.

 

I have more respect for Fabians then the revolutionaries. History shows time and time again a revolution will ultimately backlash on the revolutionaries and only sets the movement back. While I do agree that the system is being used, it's being used with a good purpose, instead of by the conservative powers to enrich themselves. In a Fabian system of government, the liberal powers are constantly the ones in charge, not giving it much time to become conservative.

 

Sure, but so long as there is a demand, there will be a supply for the product. There will always be someone there to provide it.

- - - Updated - - -

6 including me.

 

Modern business ventures do require money. You're right in that regard. But you touch upon why there is a problem with your thinking. It doesn't have to be from the rich, it can be anyone with a source of money. All it takes is an idea and some basic capital to get it off the ground. There are tales again and again that show all it takes is an idea and some simple cash to get an idea off the ground. I'm not denying being rich helps, but it's not necessary.

 

Not sure that we have further disagreements about Bill. Or that I have any interest in talking with someone who calls me dishonest because he's frustrated at his own error.




​

 

Simply increasing the circulation of money in our Institution of money based markets would generate more general tax revenue.

 

Sure but too much and then you get inflation.

 

... "All it takes is an idea and some basic capital to get it off the ground." I agree with you that you don't have to be rich to build business, that it certainly helps to have resources, but I know it takes a lot more than an idea and cash to get things off the ground.

Building business is hard. Very hard. If all you have is an idea and some cash, you'll more than likely fail. Someone needs to organize those resources, convince folks to get behind that idea, bootstrap the process into existence, keep it efficient enough to pay it's own way, prune it as issues develop with scale or market fluctuations, drive it forward when opportunities appear, and prepare it for when that idea ebbs and a new one is needed.

It's very hard. And very few people succeed.

If you want your business to be one of them, you need that guy. And no, he's not necessarily rich. But the guys who are good at it, who've succeeded before, they're most likely found among the rich. Because what makes them that good, makes money.



​

 

The people with the skill, most likely are rich, but that's not necessarily true. I'm not denying that the rich help, but it's not needed. People with the skills are going to be the people with capital. They don't have to be rich, they can simply be the people with the necessary training and skill they have from job experience or school.

 

It didn't happen with quantitative easing; why should we expect it from real people actually spending money on goods and services?

 

It's easy to take risks when you've got a system that bails you out. All you have to do is get "too big to fail" and you're set. The rest of us, the ones that have to work for a living, are screwed from the beginning. We're basically paying for the cost of our own imprisonment.

 

Solving for simple poverty when merely due to a lack of income from gainful employment in any at-will employment State could end that form of "wage slavery".

 

It ain't easy getting that big and your prison has an open door.




​

 

At that point the effects of it are going to be slow as well, whether good or bad.