No Mr. Romney, Rich People Do Not Create Jobs

You guys will do anything to not work. Get a job.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Huge companies like BP. Exxon, Ford,..ect, spend millions if not billions on research and development. They take huge risks and need capital to expand.
How much does 1 deep water oil rig cost? Between $340 million to $560 million, and that is just 1 rig. And that does not include the daily cost of turning such a rig that can run up to about $500,000 a day. If a huge company is going to be able to put it's profit into research and development as well as expansion and keeping the best talent available, they need to watch the bottom line and make and keep as much money as possible.

BP may be a bad choice considering the recent oil spill but I was just using it as an example of a large company that spends a fortune on research and development.

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

Originally posted by inverslyproportional

Instead of forcing all businesses to pay minimum wage, which isn't enough anyways, it should be closer to $15 at least. It would force businesses that do very well to pay very well to their workers.

For example walmart would be paying workers closer to $50,000 or $60,000 a year instead of the less than $15,000 most are making now. As they are making plenty of money, they are just hoarding it for their already billionaire owners(like they need another penny) and their investors.

It start to be ridiculous! If Wallmart employees were paid $60,000 the price on everything would go up tremendously and people would simply stop to go at Walmart to buy Chinese junk. The whole Walmart franchise would shut down.

Look what is happening is Greece. They love big government that pay for everything. Now the government is broke and had to cut everywhere.

Would you mind helping them rioting in the street to get more "free" government money?


This is exactly what the Greece government did. The government increased the tax on business to give to those who are doing nothing and/or are waiting to get a fat government pension at 50 year old.

This is your plan in action right now as we speak. This is exactly what you're proposing. Look at the results.

Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Co. SA (EEEK), the world’s second-largest Coca-Cola bottler, will quit the Athens stock exchange for London next year.

www.businessweek.com...

What do you think the other companies will do? They'll bail out of Greece and let the country sink with their people with fat pensions and social benefits.

reply to post by Sparky63


That still does not mean everything is hunky dory. how many people have been in the same situation you are in and take the same steps and it does not workout??? do we just say '"OH IT SUCKS TO BE YOU" or "OH IF I CAN DO IT SO COULD YOU AND IF YOU FAIL YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG"

It "worked" for you.(LOL) There are many people that do the "right" thing and it didn't work out for them. Getting prepared to get ahead in life is one thing. Seizing opportunities is another thing. Taking advantage of the opportunities is something else as well

You look at others and say that based upon your experience they are not doing the right things to get ahead or they are doing it wrong .(lazy) so everything is fine as is .. because it worked for you.

From my point of view you are are doing it wrong and its not workign. you got married before you had the ability to afford a child. heck you even got married before you were in a position to have a wife. how can someone be dependent on you if you are dependent on someone else to give you a lively hood??

if i took your attitude i can point out... the way it should be done is that you should become independent before you even chase s skirt. Your lively hood is based not on your employer but yourself. If you lose your employer today you should be fine. Meaning they have no power over you.. I am willing to bet you still are at the mercy of your employer. I am not dependent on my employer.. and that is when I got a family. i can quit my job today and work at mcdees if i wanted to and be fine with my current living situation. can you? if not you are doing it wrong.

You think you are making a good living right now?? haha how naive... you should be getting more. Your labor is worth more than you give yourself credit for and other people know their labor is worth more than what is being payed out today. you are made to believe it is not.

I am not even talking about small business. They are small fry. those are not the ones causing the problems today. The ones that are cause the problems are the ones who monopolize everything and drive wages down. Which would not be a bad thing if the cost of living went down but it doesn't.

Just because I am doing fine.. and in your mind you are doing fine,we should not believe everything is hunky dory. quite frankly since both of us are doing fine why they heck do we even bother participating in such a topic. You because you think people are lazy and they should work harder to make it in a system that caters to the rich. I am here because I know what pricks Big businesses are and how they view people. YOu are just bean to be added and subtracted. You want to crap on the beans and I want crap on those who make us beans to be counted and subtracted. fyi you are a bean. ( My job for a time was to figure out how to fire people like you..the laborer)

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

Huge companies like BP. Exxon, Ford,..ect, spend millions if not billions on research and development. They take huge risks and need capital to expand.
How much does 1 deep water oil rig cost? Between $340 million to $560 million, and that is just 1 rig. And that does not include the daily cost of turning such a rig that can run up to about $500,000 a day. If a huge company is going to be able to put it's profit into research and development as well as expansion and keeping the best talent available, they need to watch the bottom line and make and keep as much money as possible.

BP may be a bad choice considering the recent oil spill but I was just using it as an example of a large company that spends a fortune on research and development.

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

Some day a new company will form which will turn those purely self-interested conceptions on their head, where the passionate doers will be rewarded and given more, and from those who don't have anything to offer even what they think they have and cherish selfishly, will be taken away. I can't wait..

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Didn't Bill Gates start Microsoft from his own home as a college dropout and programmer? And what about Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, who started out much the same way more as electronic hobbiests with a great idea, working up the first PC on a part time basis out of Steve's garage?

Honestly I find the whole idea that everyone has to work FOR someone else ie: a rich person, that all are dependant on that, to be somewhat repulsive.

The little guy with an idea, he's the one who'll move the world and create the next wave of new jobs and innovation.

Same thing with the founders of Yahoo. Albert Einstein he was a patent office clerk when he changed the world.

C'mon people, we're not all at the mercy of the rich, many of whom are a-holes who think themselves a cut above the rest.

Bravo! Exactly! People need to stop whining about how "unfair" the world is and knuckle down and get busy and creative. If you want the rich to cough up some money...figure out a way to get them to pay you!

Think about it. Not EVERY one that is rich is all that bright. There is a LOT of old money that is just being managed well for heirs of the real movers and shakers. How many times have you heard of "rich wives" having personal Masseuse therapists or a psychic adviser or spiritual coaches. How about ridiculously expensive, one of a kind...wine racks or other custom furniture. Crazy pets that need special care. Then they need people to take care of their properties and exotic possessions...boats, cars, etc.

If people would invest half the effort into "thinking creatively" as they do in raging against the machine....they might surprise themselves at how clever and ingenuitive they can be!

The best way to get the money from the rich is to pander to their wishes...and then...when you have cleverly collected a fortune...you can decide if the Gov can come in and take a lion's share and re-distribute it. How's that for some thought provoking input?

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

...or the employees of that company for that matter either. What company do you work for? I'd like to buy some share in it and push for lower wages and make more money for myself.

uhh... yes, rich people DO create jobs. Government creates all the entitled worthless people.

I employ people. Those people have families, homes, cars, and are consumers. That makes the world go around.

I'm so sick of these entitled little whining brats that think everything should be provided for them, from healthcare to housing, insurance, phones, cars, and the list goes on. Get a freaking job and be in control of your own damn life. Better yet, start a business or two. I did, and I came from a welfare household, below poverty level, no education or high school diploma. What is your excuse?

reply to post by Jeremiah65


I'm not sure where along the way this topic became an argument over people being lazy.

This isn't about people being lazy or wanting a handout. This discussion is about the failure of "trickle down economics" and how rich people do not directly create jobs.

The fact of the matter is that it hasn't worked. If it had worked under Bush Jr, we wouldn't be where we're at now.

You don't plant a seed in bad soil, it won't grow. Wealthy people aren't going to plant any seeds unless we can figure out how to make the soil of our country more fertile.

I'm glad I've seen so many diverse suggestions on the root causes of this, and perhaps we might be able to figure out some possible solutions. I'd gladly contact my congressional delegation with some fresh, good ideas!

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

...or the employees of that company for that matter either. What company do you work for? I'd like to buy some share in it and push for lower wages and make more money for myself.

I don't want lower wages for my employees. I want the choice to pay them what I think is fair. If they don't think it's fair they are welcome to find another job with no hard feelings on my part. I love nothing more than giving my employees a raise when they deserve it.

reply to post by knows_but_doesnt


If there wasn't a demand for your product or service, would you have a company?

That is the core issue. Demand for a product or service creates a need for jobs. You do not create jobs out of thin air unless you need them to keep up with demand.

So no sir, you do not create jobs. The economy in which you do business creates the need for you to hire people.

I am not sure why this concept is so hard to understand?

Originally posted by Sparky63

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

...or the employees of that company for that matter either. What company do you work for? I'd like to buy some share in it and push for lower wages and make more money for myself.

I don't want lower wages for my employees. I want the choice to pay them what I think is fair. If they don't think it's fair they are welcome to find another job with no hard feelings on my part. I love nothing more than giving my employees a raise when they deserve it.

Did you not say in the above that you want to make the most on your money? How about investing in your employees? Or is that not a "smart business move"?

PINK FLOYD - THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON (1973)- MONEY:

Money, get away
Get a good job with more pay
And your O.K.

Money, it's a gas
Grab that cash with both hands
And make a stash

New car, caviar, four star daydream
Think I'll buy me a football team

Money get back
I'm all right Jack
Keep your hands off my stack

Money, it's a hit
Don't give me that
Do goody good bull....

I'm in the hi-fidelity
First class traveling set
And I think I need a Lear jet

(Sax and guitar solos)

Money, it's a crime
Share it fairly
But don't take a slice of my pie

Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil
Today

But if you ask for a rise
It's no surprise that they're
Giving none away
Away
Away
Away
Away...

"Hu Huh! I was in the right!"
"Yes, absolutely in the right!"
"I certainly was in the right!"
"You was definitely in the right. That geezer was cruising for a bruising!"
"Yeah!"
"Why does anyone do anything?"
"I don't know, I was really drunk at the time!"

Originally posted by Sparky63

Originally posted by MystikMushroom

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

As a shareholder I want and expect as much return on my money as possible. I am not interested in making the employees rich.

...or the employees of that company for that matter either. What company do you work for? I'd like to buy some share in it and push for lower wages and make more money for myself.

I don't want lower wages for my employees. I want the choice to pay them what I think is fair. If they don't think it's fair they are welcome to find another job with no hard feelings on my part. I love nothing more than giving my employees a raise when they deserve it.

I think most people feel this way! If you own a company you pay them as well as you can and treat the good ones well because it is very disruptive always training new people and you want loyalty also. It is a natural process and I don't see any reason for government to be involved.
You treat them bad they leave the ones who will not do their work or show up, you don't want to treat as well and they leave.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by knows_but_doesnt

 

If there wasn't a demand for your product or service, would you have a company?

That is the core issue. Demand for a product or service creates a need for jobs. You do not create jobs out of thin air unless you need them to keep up with demand.

So no sir, you do not create jobs. The economy in which you do business creates the need for you to hire people.

I am not sure why this concept is so hard to understand?

There was no market demand for the Segway before it was invented. Someone had to put a lot of money, time and effort into creating it, testing and then creating, yes, creating, a market for it. They had to convince police forces, security companies, municipalities , ect. that it would be a beneficial product. They created a desire for it where one did nor previously exist. You are discounting the efforts and sacrifices of the people who created a new industry out of nothing. Now you want to decide how much return on their investment they should have.
No thanks. I don't trust your judgement or anyone else's who thinks they know what's best for my business or the national economy.
I want these innovators to have the incentive, motive and means to continue to create industries and the jobs that inevitably follow.

reply to post by Sparky63


Once again, someone like Steve Jobs or the creator of the Segway did not single handed create jobs. Here:

Furthermore, the money used to buy iPhones and iPads was not created out of thin air. When the money used to buy iPhones and iPads was spent on iPhones and iPads, it was not spent on something else. In other words, if Steve Jobs and Apple had NOT invented the iPhone and iPad, the money used to buy them would likely have been used to buy something else — and the companies that made the something else would have "created" the jobs.

Apple's building of a better mousetrap, in other words, did not suddenly "create jobs." It moved the jobs. It moved the jobs from the companies that were making the older mousetraps to the one that was making the better mousetrap (and, in this case, it mostly moved them to Asia, which is another issue). In fact, to the extent that Apple created a more efficient manufacturing process for its better mousetraps, Apple and Steve Jobs may actually have destroyed jobs, not created them.

If you still don't believe it, think of it this way:

Imagine if Steve Jobs and Apple had only been able to sell their miraculous new iPhones and iPads in Bangladesh, where the average per-capita income is about $1,700 a year.
How many jobs do you think Steve Jobs and Apple would have "created" then?
Not many.

Business Insider

Edit to add: There wasn't a demand for the first ipod either, many at the time thought it was foolish of Apple.

Originally posted by votan
reply to post by Sparky63

 

That still does not mean everything is hunky dory. how many people have been in the same situation you are in and take the same steps and it does not workout??? do we just say '"OH IT SUCKS TO BE YOU" or "OH IF I CAN DO IT SO COULD YOU AND IF YOU FAIL YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG"

It "worked" for you.(LOL) There are many people that do the "right" thing and it didn't work out for them. Getting prepared to get ahead in life is one thing. Seizing opportunities is another thing. Taking advantage of the opportunities is something else as well

You look at others and say that based upon your experience they are not doing the right things to get ahead or they are doing it wrong .(lazy) so everything is fine as is .. because it worked for you.

From my point of view you are are doing it wrong and its not workign. you got married before you had the ability to afford a child. heck you even got married before you were in a position to have a wife. how can someone be dependent on you if you are dependent on someone else to give you a lively hood??

if i took your attitude i can point out... the way it should be done is that you should become independent before you even chase s skirt. Your lively hood is based not on your employer but yourself. If you lose your employer today you should be fine. Meaning they have no power over you.. I am willing to bet you still are at the mercy of your employer. I am not dependent on my employer.. and that is when I got a family. i can quit my job today and work at mcdees if i wanted to and be fine with my current living situation. can you? if not you are doing it wrong.

You think you are making a good living right now?? haha how naive... you should be getting more. Your labor is worth more than you give yourself credit for and other people know their labor is worth more than what is being payed out today. you are made to believe it is not.

I am not even talking about small business. They are small fry. those are not the ones causing the problems today. The ones that are cause the problems are the ones who monopolize everything and drive wages down. Which would not be a bad thing if the cost of living went down but it doesn't.

Just because I am doing fine.. and in your mind you are doing fine,we should not believe everything is hunky dory. quite frankly since both of us are doing fine why they heck do we even bother participating in such a topic. You because you think people are lazy and they should work harder to make it in a system that caters to the rich. I am here because I know what pricks Big businesses are and how they view people. YOu are just bean to be added and subtracted. You want to crap on the beans and I want crap on those who make us beans to be counted and subtracted. fyi you are a bean. ( My job for a time was to figure out how to fire people like you..the laborer)

Your analysis of my life is so far off it is clear you are just grasping here to make a point. I said in my post I was content with my job. You see, I made enough money for me and my wife to have a comfortable, yet simple life. We had decided not to have kids due to a medical condition my wife had, in fact the Dr. told her that she could not even get pregnant.
Well, he was wrong and she had a bun in the oven., Life sometimes throws you a curve ball and you have to make adjustments. That doesn't mean that I had made a bad decision to get married. You opinion on this is highly flawed.
I didn't whine and complain about my lot in life, I didn't blame my employer for not paying me enough. I made the necessary adjustments based on the changing circumstances.

The decision I made was a good one. We ended up with 5 kids and couldn't be happier.

Not everyone has the abilities I had, hell I didn't even know I had them until I was forced to explore my options. Sometime life hands people circumstances that are beyond their control to change. The average worker in a job is not without options. They can better themselves in many different ways, some that don't require a degree or a large output of money.
Some here are making average workers sound like little more than victims, when nothing could be further from the truth.

I have no doubt that you mean well and are sincere in your desire to make life better for people. but moving to a socialist economy or anything similar is not the answer to our problems. IMHO.

I am not crapping on my employees. I pay them an honest wage for their labor. 5 years ago we were doing 150 projects a year and turning work away because we could not do it all. Last year we were down to 50 and this year will be less. None of my employees got a pay cut. They didn't get a raise either though. I value my employees, and their hard work. I crap on none of them. Amazing how you can know so much about my life and feelings without even knowing my name.

reply to post by chameleonwalker


This is in no way my plan, as under my plan, there would be a vastly reduced tax structure, as there wouldn't be much if any kind of welfare. As the workers would be able to support themselves just fine.

There woulnt be social security for all, as everyone would have the ability to save and invvest for their own retirements.

Your thinking to much in the current system and not enough outside the box.

As farr as the other member who mentioned RandD, the employees them selves would float some of that burden, as they would hold a personal stake in the companies future, so it would be in their best interest to help fund these ventures, as they would help the company thus the workers do better.

In the current system the only person making any investment between the 2 parties are the workers investing their lives in a company that does care if they live or die, or lose their job tommorrow, yet demands loyalty from their employees, and that they perform at top levels without any kind of incentive really except keeping their job.

In my version, the employees and the companies would be investing in eachother, to help build the best company possible, the employer invests in the financial independents of the workers, the workers invest their time and efforts, into improving the company, so they can make a better living.

This cycle really would reinforce itself, as it is in the best interests of everyone involved to work together to accomplish the most, with the least waste.

Instead of the current model, where companies act more like parasites, taking as much from employees as possible, while giving back as little as possible, it wuld be more like a symbiotic relationship, where everhone could do more together through cooperation, than either could, by trying to do as little as possible for the other, which is the way it currently works.

If a company pays crap, and has no benefits, the employees will do as little as possible to keep their job, hurting the company, causing waste, and overall restricting productivity, while employers, will not pay enough to live o , and act like it isn't their responsibilty to pay a livable wage, which is the only reason anyone ever got the job in the first place.

The current model from the business side acts like people should work for free because the business and its profits are the only thing in the world that matters, so their workers, show them the same respect in return, and slack off when the boss is absent, intentionally make less quality goods, as their crap paying jobs demands 500 units a day, not 500 perfect units a day, and the employee has no incentive whatsoever except working only as hard and with as little quality as possible to stay employed.