No Mr. Romney, Rich People Do Not Create Jobs

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
The government shouldn't directly create jobs. In other words, hiring more tax code people for the IRS. What they CAN do is pump more money into the middle/lower classes to enable those people to spend more money. This in turn would create greater revenues and encourage growth and job creation.

I don't think you fully gasp the concept here?

One way government can "pump" money to the middle class is by lowing their taxes and their tax rates. Give me more of my own money back and I just might spread the wealth around by buying more stuff. The way things are going now I am not just saving up for a rainy day, but for economic collapse. Lack of confidence in the government results in a reduction of "consuming".

reply to post by BlueAjah


^^^^ This.

And even though I'm not a big fan of Romney, he did bring this up in the debate. We have a problem with China because China as a whole does not yet demand the same standard of living that we do. That means that labor is cheap there, and without tariffs to level the playing field our manufacturing (and thus our middle class) will generally be at a significant disadvantage. Although our relationship with China is "economically good" in the sense that our economy is stronger when viewed as a whole, our society is suffering the consequences of a single class having access to most of the benefits of such a system.

Obama's solution to the problem is to tax the upper class in order to provide some semblance of order to the lower classes, but in doing so he is setting a bad precedent by nullifying property rights. There is not a single instance in history where this approach has ended well.

Romney's solution (provided he actually carries it out if he becomes president) could actually harm our economy as a whole, but would probably be in the best interest of our national security and our middle class because manufacturing should return to the United States in order to take full advantage of our markets (by bypassing tariffs.)

reply to post by MystikMushroom


In the real world, small companies would start and would grow if it were not for the government at many levels stopping them.

My husbands family owns a restaurant in Oregon, at the Ca border. A restaurant was being sold in California that would make it easier for my husband as we live in California, so his family bought it.

The place was doing business until they closed. The California state inspector came in and said all the appliances that were working fine had to be replaced, so all new freezers, stove hood counter tops everything! These things are very expensive and for those that don't know, even a freezer that looks like yours at home and sometimes does not even work as well, cannot be bought like you do, they all must be business approved right down to the microwave all at double or triple what a homeowner pays.

Then all set weeks of work, busy tourist season is coming if it is not opened then, the long slow winter months with no income will shut it down straight off after the initial investment.

The inspector comes back, says the beautiful vinyl floor in the kitchen must now be tile! meaning all installations must now come out and start all over again. Then he says the restrooms must have second mirrors, besides the ones above the sink there must be ones that a wheelchair bound person can see in, but it is not safe to put them on the existing doors and because the rooms must measure a certain size and spaces between things for wheel chairs the existing sinks must come out and replumbing on a concrete floor.

The existing tables suddenly will not do and there are to many, the existing 5 fire extinguishers must be moved to really dumb places and replaced with a new kind...on and on, turns out the previous owner lost the place because a fight with the owner over the lease price....we didn't even know, the inspector is a friend and his boys play football with HER kids, he is blaming us the new owner!

We lose everything because he delays the opening until after the summer tourists we open in winter wirth months of very low income and just trying to get a start and some regular customers.

This is a tiny example of how jobs for 6 people and whatever future we may have had for more employees was destroyed by regulation that makes no sense and is abused, sometimes for bribes and all kinds of garbage.

reply to post by jimmiec

Romney knows how to fix China's cheating and will do so.

Ohh!! Okay then.





What do you mean he's going to "fix" China's cheating!?? HOW? Is he going to take over China? Insist that all those workers his "troubleshooting" employed get paid a living wage? Pull American businesses OUT of China until China starts acting right?? Yeah. Sure he is. He's going to "fix"China. AND America. He's Superman.

Tell me again: HOW?

reply to post by Char-Lee


First I'll start off by saying that I don't know how they do it in restaurants, but I do know about construction, and the laws regarding building code and they are set by each individual state. That's not a federal thing. Is the restaurants a federal thing or does it also vary state to state with these regulations?

reply to post by Char-Lee


You should really make a thread just to share this story. People that vote a certain way have NO idea what is going on with small business. The creators of 80% of all jobs in this country. THIS is an excellent example of liberal idiocy at work.

reply to post by ldyserenity


They have to follow local, state, and federal rules. Oftentimes the rules conflict. You simply have no idea the hoops people must jump through to start a business. It is nearly impossible in states like California anymore.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Obviously, the coined phrase "trickle-down economics" was invented to counter Reagan's presidential campain. What it is is Capitalism, nothing more.

Capitalism, also obvious. works. The world operates on it. Even the communists. Socialism cannot even exist without capitalism to fund the redistribution of wealth, that is the mainstay of socialists. socialism wouldn't even exist.

As the left continue to ignore this fact, even Obama has said small business is where the economy will grow, Romney's people coined the counter phrase. 'Trickled down government". We have seen the results. 30% higher welfare rolls than four short years ago. Of course, that increased number become dependent on Gov't and the lefts "generosity".

Supply side economics does work, well, even better without gov't interference and strengthening it will turn the economy around.

To say supply side economics doesn't work is like saying gravity doesn't work. It not only works, pretty well everything hinges on it. I suggest the ivory towered individuals get out into the real world and get some empirical experience and re-evaluate....

I wanted to hear the pros and cons of a "trickle down ecomony". I wished to understand "Supply Side Economics".

It wasn't an easy feat. There are lots of numbers from a lot of varying sources.

My conclusion after 6 hours of intense study ...

I in no way want to imply an inadequate amount of research done for the thread by OP, but I just couldn't help but burst out laughing! I don't want to take anything away from you, it just that your wording made it a bit funny.

Economics is just suchs a vastly complex subject and and very much an inexact science with few if any default answers to how to coerce shifting trends into the heading of your liking.

Don't get me wrong, six hours worth of reading on any given subject can get you a long way towards understanding the fundamentals, but in the end of the day, it can only take you so long.

Anyway, interesting thread, interesting subject.

Cheers

you peeps actually want to do something about all of this rather than trying to show your stick size by your google links?

its called dont buy the #, take your money out of bank of america, stop buy fast food, you dont need a smartphone and a ipad, you dont need mostly anything......but you want to show your stick size. those 3 tv's working out for ya?



a job is not hard to find, people just dont want to work.

I, on the other hand, believe that the statement that "the rich do not create jobs" is a lie. I realized this by watching things like this and Modern Marvels:



When you look at that video, you'll see that there is a lot of equipment making those sodas. A lot of that equipment costs a lot of money, money that poor people don't have.

And when you ask questions like, well how are poor people who can't afford that kind of manufacturing equipment just to make the bottles alone, so where would they get that kind of money? How would they get the kind of resources to gather or manufacture all of that equipment? And where does it all come from.

The answer, is, of course, the rich.

And when you realize that you realize that a lot of things being said is just another way to demonize the rich people. The only real purpose to demonize rich people? It's to take their money away from them any dirty means possible. Many people are jealous of the rich and think that they have to take their money away to punish them just for being rich and are blinded to a lot of things going from that envy. But otherwise, it's really nothing but a bunch of junk. They just don't understand how capitalism works, and often confuse capitalism with corporatism.

Now, I'm not stupid and I do realize that many rich people are shady and corrupt, but there are also those that aren't and do do a lot of good for people and a community and do actually provide things.

The main difference between someone rich and someone poor is the ability to manage money and finances. Have you seen how much crap (Chinese cheap crap from Wall-mart) the average American is buying? They're buying stuff that they don't even need and they put themselves into debt to buy that stuff.

The average American has no idea how to manage his own money and/or finance. So it doesn't matter if they've 1 million or $50 in the bank because at the end they don't know how to invest and/or make their money work for them. They're spending and wasting their money right away without thinking.

The average American is living above his means at full scale without planning and/or understanding the future. But they watch a crap load of TV, football and other stupidities that just make them feel good while they're losing a precious none renewal commodity - time.

Every time when you buy a Chinese good you're voting with your wallet. Every $ spent in a Chinese good is a favorable vote for the business men that decided to move his production in China. You don't want the job to leave the country then stop buying at Wall-Mart and stop buying Chinese goods - Period!

American people have the power to change things but they don't do it. And because they've wasted so much time in front of the TV and money at Wall-Mart the time is running out.

They need to look at the real problem and take action.

(I'm not going to get in a debate about Austrain vs Keynesian vs Neo-.. etc.)

The social issue is that people are demonizing the ~creation~ of capital equally to the alleged ~hoarding~ of capital. THAT'S the problem.

The dynamics that contribute to people making fresh new money (the rich getting richer lousy label) aren't the same as people sitting on "old" money - and the groups don't have as obvious an overlap as waiving a sign that says Rothschild on it would have you believe.

Lets take the jobs overseas example and my own experience that has been mirrored by many I know first-hand. Lets take Chengdu vs most Amercan cities. The biggest barriers to domestic job exploration in the short term for many new business in that comparison are:

- Lead time to human capital
- Lead time to licensing
- Lead time to equipment

It's easy to say "right now" there are a lot of people available to work if you train them, etc. but it's not just that. Context matters. Finding qualified people that then also require some additional State or Federal licensing - that even if they have it requires a specific bond. That then also requires a registration to come back from a local County official. This all pushes lead time out that removes the advantage of having well spoken in-person local dialogues (as many who have off-shored know in-person hands-on beats video any day).

Those three things blend together and make something that takes twenty to thirty days to get "operational" in China take six months or more in the US. That window itself is a HUGE disservice.

Only after you remove those logistical barriers does corporate tax rates even become and issue (e.g. Canada vs US).

So there are a lot of higher-energy "rich" entrepreneurs who wants MOVEMENT in their innovation and investments more than sitting on it. The US has created a hostile environment to that.

I'm pretty convinced after dealing up-close-and-personal with so many of these "rich" and watching they rack their heads against regulatory walls - and watching them hire people for GOOD wages only to have to kill a US operation because some paper-pusher kept delaying - that if we remove those impediments then the issues of wages and investment at home quickly fade into better perspective.

My $0.02, exchange rates may vary, except in China where they better be exactly WTF I say they are or I'll throw you in prison with one-eyed-Chu, -Mags

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
When I read this article, this jumped out at me:

David Stockman, who was Ronald Reagan's budget director and economic guru, says Ryanomics is a "fairy tale." Stockman was one of the architects of "supply side" economics (aka trickle-down). Today he states unequivocally that trickle-down doesn't work.

LINK

I mean, if the guy that invented "trickle down" economics itself now claims it's a fairy tale, and it's exactly what Romney/Ryan want to do...

I'm really not sure that Obama's plan is really any better, at least not in the immediate future. Turning a ship as large as the USA around takes tremendous effort and time. This is something the American people don't want. Hey, I want a quick fix too -- but I don't see one coming from either side.

First of all, Stockman did not invent "trickle down economics" as "trickle down economics" is simply a derogatory term for supply side economics, a theory which has been around for centuries. Secondly, it is somewhat arrogant for someone who himself has admitted that he has only spent six hours studying a topic of which many people spend years studying to be able to state definitively that one side is incorrect in their beliefs. Your OP as well as your responses display, at best, a tenuous grasp of economics. Regurgitating excerpts from a few biased articles here and there hardly makes you an expert qualified to formulated an educated opinion.

There is a quick and easy fix to this, everyone keeps overlooking and dismissing when it is mentioned.

If a company makes millions or billions of proits a year, their work force should not be at the poverty level and receiving welfare, they should be paying their empllyees better, as they are obviously making plenty of money already.

Not paying their employees nothing, and leaving them to be fed and housed by the tax payers. This is one of the biggest problems, when walmart makes hundreds of billions in profits, and had a majority of their work force qualify for welfare.

If a company makes over a million in profits a year, reguardless of size, their payroll should be directly tied to how much money they make, either in a hourly pay rate, or quarterly or yearly bonuses, to make up the difference.

For example, if a cmpany makes a million in profits in a year, and only paid out, $100,000 in payroll they should be reuired to pay bonuses to their employees of $400,000. Thus half the money would go to those actually making the money for the company( the workers) and the other half would go to the owner(s). Thus everyone is taken care of, and everyone gets to profit from the hard work involved in making the company profittable.

Now I made no mention of the way the money should be divided up, as some employees will be deserving a little more than others, as they are better more skilled etc workers. Thus being a good worker still has benefits, the company gets to make their money, and no more millionaires, forceing the taxpayers to feed their employees while they make ridiculous amounts of profits.

Everyone would be able to be independent, and take care of their own, and nobody willing to work would be on welfare.

Most of the countries problems would be solved this year, not in 10, not in 20, this year, before the end of 2013 the entire situation would resolve itself, as the consumers would alway be guaranteed a fare pay rate, as it is based off a percentage of profits, not hard dollar amounts, would fuel efficiency, as everyone would work harder tol make the company more profittable, as their pay is based off its profits directly, the rich could no longer funnel all the profits to the top, leaving their employees out in the cold, reliant on welfare, when the company makes billions in profits.

There are some refinments to made, but this seems like the best way to base an economy to ensure the workers are not left out of the profit margins without completely stiffling capitalisms bebefits.

Originally posted by ninjamikec
you peeps actually want to do something about all of this rather than trying to show your stick size by your google links?

its called dont buy the #, take your money out of bank of america, stop buy fast food, you dont need a smartphone and a ipad, you dont need mostly anything......but you want to show your stick size. those 3 tv's working out for ya?

a job is not hard to find, people just dont want to work.

edit on 10/18/2012 by tothetenthpower because: --Mod Edit--Replaced word.

edit on 10/18/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)

110% AGREE

People in this country are just too lazy, they want too much and they're entitled to everything. They've the feeling that the world owe them. The car industry moved out of the US because people were asking too much with their unions. Producing in this country was not profitable anymore for those businesses. The main goal of a business is to make profit. With profit they hire more people. With no profit they shut down the place and move-on to another location.

Stop spending your money on things that you do not need.
Why would you have a smartphone and pay about $100 / month of service? Unless the smartphone is a tool for you to generate more $$$ you don't need that. It's a total waste.

Why would you buy a huge Ford F-150 that drink more gas than anything else? Unless the F-150 is a tool for you to generate more $$$ you don't need that. Get a small economic car instead. Oh you might not "look" as cool as in your black truck with huge tires but who cares? You'll put few thousands more in your pocket at the end of the year.

Shut down the TV and look at your life and cut what you don't need.

reply to post by Tardacus


The problem is that there are too many regulations for ANYONE rich or poor to create jobs right now. Between tax penalties, disparities in tariffs, and overall red tape rules and regulations, it's not really "the rich" to blame, per say. It's government's fault.

This economy can be turned around and booming is six months!!

Withdraw from the WTO, put a 10% surcharge on every manufactured, non-food import that comes into the US exemping Canada and Mexico.(oil) and increase it by 10% every six months to, say, 30% max.

We'd be begging for mexican laborers.LOL.

The rest of the world would be thrown into a depression, unfortunately.

Sorry about that......

Originally posted by beezzer
So you want wealth redistribution. You want to punish success and reward people who have done nothing to earn it.

I fully grasp your concept, sir. I just disagree with it.

You poor confused rabbit.

It's not wealth redistribution.

It's wealth reacquisition.

For it to be redistribution the obscenely wealthy (talking billionaires--not some pathetic multi-millionaire) would have had to "earn" or "produce" the wealth they possess.

A third generation Walton hardly worked hard to earn their lot in life.

Also ... rabbit stew is very tasty.



*rubs his stomach*

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
There is a quick and easy fix to this, everyone keeps overlooking and dismissing when it is mentioned.
If a company makes over a million in profits a year, reguardless of size, their payroll should be directly tied to how much money they make, either in a hourly pay rate, or quarterly or yearly bonuses, to make up the difference.

For example, if a cmpany makes a million in profits in a year, and only paid out, $100,000 in payroll they should be reuired to pay bonuses to their employees of $400,000. Thus half the money would go to those actually making the money for the company( the workers) and the other half would go to the owner(s). Thus everyone is taken care of, and everyone gets to profit from the hard work involved in making the company profittable.

If that would have to happen ALL businesses would leave the country next week and go in China or anywhere else. It's a total communist way of seeing things. Look at France right now. Their president wants to tax business and rich people 75% of their income. What do you think those business and rich people are doing right now? They're preparing to quit and leave the country and France will end-up like Greece very soon.