Rich People Don't Create Jobs...

Yes. The investor does create the company, but a job is a problem that needs solving. Using your example of the next IBM or skin cancer cure, if people cant buy your product it causes the company to fail, then the investor loses his money correct? Someone invest's a billion into some scientist/Doctor and he gets the cure to skin cancer..which example would create more jobs? That one doctor in his lab selling 5 cures a year for a million bucks (sure he has his small staff), or curing the world of cancer for $10k a person? Problem: Only the rich could pay the million...but im sure any one could come up with 10k if they wanted to to cure there cancer. hence what i got out of the video is the consumer would create the jobs..needing more facility's,doctors,staff, security, machines, maintenance...etc.

 

I always hear 1% apologists saying how the tax rates or policy don't really effect the ultra rich. Like, I'm sure that that special, privileged low 20% maximum capital gains tax rate (and no SS/Medicare taxes on it!) doesn't same them beaucoup bucks on taxes.

Yet they'll fight to the death to protect those same special privileges, loopholes, breaks and deductions they say do not matter.

 

What do you expect? They own the politicians. Of course capital gains are going to be taxed lower than labored income. I support both being taxed at 0%.

I am opposed to taxation on principle, not because of any effect it has.

I support all reductions in taxation - so long as they go along with equivalent reductions in spending. I do so without qualification, without exception, and without preference to any economic class.

I agree - the tax system allows the ultra-rich to avoid (not evade) tax with their armies of lawyers and accountants which the upper middle class cannot. Much better to eliminate the loopholes and cut taxes across the board.

 

Thanks for sharing your opinions. I disagree with them. You cannot have an ordered society without government and you cannot have government without taxes.

But that wasn't really the issue.

 

They fight because taxes and government bureaucracy hurts America.

Sorry, but the government is not some benign entity. It's an unfortunate necessity, but only in rare instances. People who understand that violence is not a great and wonderful thing just can't grasp that concept of a government as not being the greatest thing since microwave popcorn.

They're just too stupid to figure that one out because they've listened and believed the lies that politicians tell them. Just give the politicians more guns, more prisons, more taxes, and they'll make the country awesome again!

Democrats are just too stupid to realize that guns and prisons don't make the country great.

 

Complete nonsense.

Government is made up of people like any other organization. It performs important functions in an ordered society. Just like other organizations.

"Democrats are just too stupid to realize that guns and prisons don't make the country great."? That's a new one on me.

 

Isn't that what I just wrote?

 

Yep.

.........

 

Clearly we agree on the collusion between government and industry. We disagree on the remedy.

 

Yeah umm. The way business works is, if my bosses are taxed into creation, then they have less money in their pockets and less money to reinvest in the company. The problem with the left is they think these people who work incredibly hard are sitting in their chairs in their penthouse office looking out their corner window with a big cigar and scotch bellowing muahahahahahaha
In reality my bosses offices are right next to mine and I have a better view only they don't care because they are too busy working to notice and too busy working on ways to grow the business and create jobs.

 

Rich people cannot in themselves BE the economy, but merely apart of the same. Masses of people buying and selling are just as if not more important than the workings and endeavors of a few wealthy individuals.

 

He was also nicely destroyed during this debate.

 

Interesting opinion. I'd like to see your argument supporting it.

 

The problem with the article is of course that if having more money in the hands of the rich really did create more jobs and a better economy then the United States should clearly be in the best shape of it's entire history? We now have more billionaires and trillionaires than any time in history and wealth inequality is at record levels and yet the GDP growth is anemic at best and employment numbers are not setting any records.

 

Name one Sucessful country without a government or tax system. Feel free to use the entire history of civilization in your search.

 

The business owners ability to invest towards a product or service with the right price and with the right market strategy to the right niche...and eventually making a profit doing so... is what creates the jobs you get.

I know a couple who are rich. Before they were rich, they were secure and well off. The stay at home mom started stamping custom jewelry and selling through ebay.

Her jewelry was a hit---selling easily. So with the profits she made (and five kids in the home) she offered to pay a wage to friends to help stamp and she created a website with carte. Her stuff sold like hot cakes.

With the profits from that she rented a small, hole in the wall place and expanded her custom work. Her stuff sold like hot cakes and she made more money.

With those additional profits and being additionally well off and secure financially--she rented a nice storefront location, invested in mass advertising while continuing to sell on internet and hired on 10 more people besides her original friends. The husband quit his job and became part of the business...leaving his position open for someone else.

They made more profits---and moved to a much larger location and hired more people.

The custom jewelry had a bunch of customers who loved what they offered. They gained more profits and income and expanded into three locations nationally hiring multititudes of people.

In short---the hiring of people depended on the amount of money they had to invest and their ability to feel financially secure enough to take risks.

When they were not "rich" they couldn't hire but a few friends. Its just simple commonsense known by people who live in realville.

You still have to have the ability to invest---whether pretax or not.

 

It sounds like you're saying that because something hasn't yet been done that it can't be done, which is obviously false.

 

Correct, corporations have record amounts of cash and are using it for mergers and stock buy backs. They are not using it to expand facilities or hire more workers because the consumer demand is just not there. Something like 90% of the workers in this country have not seen an actual increase in their inflation adjusted incomes for decades.

 

It actually has been done. They are called failed states and pretty much descend into anarchy and chaos.

And by the way you asked for the arguement supporting the fact that Sucessful countries require government and taxation. You didn't ask for absolute proof that it couldn't possibly happen.

 

So you're not describing a system of governance.

 

Fundamental business math flaw. Reinvestment in business is paid with pre-tax dollars.

 

If I'm not mistaken, except for the first batch of jewelry, all of the money they invested came from the consumers who purchased their product, correct?

 

So people that spend money ACTUALLY create jobs? But who creates the companies that make the widgets? DEMAND creates jobs, but someone has to step up and gather a whole bunch of people to work together to create something. That doesn't just happen. Can't have demand without money too. Where does it all start? Like I said, chicken and the egg falacy...it gets stupid.

 

And why is that money laying around? Because government policy has reduced incentives for investing through reducing the return on same. Why haven't workers seen a real increase in take home pay? Because government rules and regulations direct more and more money to the benefit side of the equation leaving little to spend on the other side. add to this other rules and regulations that reduce productivity for no real measurable gain in safety or quality.

 

Business owners' have more than enough capital to invest. The economy is awash with trillions in uninvested dollars.

But business owners don't invest in expansion unless people have the money to buy their goods.

Irrelevant anecdote.

Of course. And you have to have the demand potential to support the investment.