I can't promise that.
I can't promise that.
Sheik
All-Pro
- Messages
- 24,809
- Reaction score
- 5
I'll explain it the way I understand it as a small business owner(who's getting out, btw).
Businesses will create more jobs when it's not counterproductive. If I can employ 20 guys full time, and make worthwhile money, I'm going to do that. When I can employ 6 guys full time, and make the same amount as I am employing 20 guys(with the way it is right now) I'm going to stick with my 6 guys.
Businesses will create jobs and stimulate the economy when it's in their best interest. Not just for the hell of it. You make it worth their while by not penalizing them for being successful.
Demand will come back when the Goverment figures that out. Relax the tax laws all across the board. Lift the dumbshit regulations that only exist to drive businesses away. Then watch the economy turn around.
You put people back to work. That's the solution. You don't redistribute wealth. There's no do-overs. The people that have the money will invest in people if it's worth it.
Right now, it's not.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 3
You can't make a living working at Home Depot, superpunk. Those types of jobs are basically the only ones in demand.
You appear to be drawing a correlation between this:
which makes sense, and this:
Which makes no sense. Large corporations already find ways to pay almost no taxes to our government. What regulations exist only to drive businesses away? There is no substance to this rhetoric.
Taxes are not a penalty. This country creates an environment where these businesses and people can be successful. They are obligated in turn to contributing back to that environment (in the form of taxes) so that infrastructure and such can be expanded so that they can function more efficiently AND so that others can do what they've been able to do with the advantages that this country provides. It is selfish and counter-productive to take advantage of those things, and then turn around and say you want to keep all of your money for yourself. That is not how you create a good society for your citizens.
which makes sense, and this:
Which makes no sense. Large corporations already find ways to pay almost no taxes to our government. What regulations exist only to drive businesses away? There is no substance to this rhetoric.
Taxes are not a penalty. This country creates an environment where these businesses and people can be successful. They are obligated in turn to contributing back to that environment (in the form of taxes) so that infrastructure and such can be expanded so that they can function more efficiently AND so that others can do what they've been able to do with the advantages that this country provides. It is selfish and counter-productive to take advantage of those things, and then turn around and say you want to keep all of your money for yourself. That is not how you create a good society for your citizens.
And Sheik, to draw further on this;
You, and everyone else, are NEVER going to say "Hey, I'm raking in cash and meeting demand with six guys. Instead of keeping that extra money for myself, why don't I hire a new guy for no reason so that more people have jobs?"
That's what you and the Republican party wants us to believe that rich people are sitting around magnanimously hiring people with all this extra money from their tax breaks, loopholes and incentives. They've had this money since Bush lowered their tax rate to below what the poor/middle class pays. Where are the jobs? Why hasn't it trickled down?
Because it's absolute bullshit. Demand has to be increased first. The best way to do that is by giving the largest class of people (poor and middle) more money to spend. Tax the rich at the same rate they were taxed when Reagan was in office. Pass those tax savings onto the poor/middle class. Remove loopholes that permit huge American corporations to avoid paying taxes to our country. Jobs will have to be created because demand has increased because the majority of Americans suddenly have more money.
You, and everyone else, are NEVER going to say "Hey, I'm raking in cash and meeting demand with six guys. Instead of keeping that extra money for myself, why don't I hire a new guy for no reason so that more people have jobs?"
That's what you and the Republican party wants us to believe that rich people are sitting around magnanimously hiring people with all this extra money from their tax breaks, loopholes and incentives. They've had this money since Bush lowered their tax rate to below what the poor/middle class pays. Where are the jobs? Why hasn't it trickled down?
Because it's absolute bullshit. Demand has to be increased first. The best way to do that is by giving the largest class of people (poor and middle) more money to spend. Tax the rich at the same rate they were taxed when Reagan was in office. Pass those tax savings onto the poor/middle class. Remove loopholes that permit huge American corporations to avoid paying taxes to our country. Jobs will have to be created because demand has increased because the majority of Americans suddenly have more money.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 3
New business facilities with the capability of churning out even more product, leading to more profit? :confused
The old saying, "in order to make money, you have to spend money" pretty much applies everywhere in the business world and isn't limited to only pyramid scams and your favorite. Ponzi Jew scams.
Also it's why you'll always have a boss.
Last edited:
These will be built if there is a corresponding demand. For no other reason, and regardless of the tax rate.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 3
We're talking about in America, dude.
Yes.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 3
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot about all the various manufacturing plants that have been popping up.
Sheik
All-Pro
- Messages
- 24,809
- Reaction score
- 5
So wait, let me get this straight, GOV regulation isn't a problem, it doesnt exist?
- Messages
- 59,976
- Reaction score
- 10,143
No they dont, overall "wealth" has been reduced for most by almost 40% since Barrack Hussein Obama took office
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 3
stupidforgotwhathejustpostedpunk said:
I don't know why on Earth you switched tangents when I was specifically replying to that statement.
Basically educating your Bizarro jew ass (forgot the teachings of your forebearers) about business.
- Messages
- 3,665
- Reaction score
- 22
Beyond politics ... I've been wondering if/how much the Tropical Storm/Hurricane situation has hurt the Republicans.
The storm has 1. cut the convention back by a day and 2. been a major story that distracts the populace from the convention.
I assume the effect isn't huge, but then this looks to be a close election ....
The storm has 1. cut the convention back by a day and 2. been a major story that distracts the populace from the convention.
I assume the effect isn't huge, but then this looks to be a close election ....
Sheik
All-Pro
- Messages
- 24,809
- Reaction score
- 5
Why is there no demand, though?
Could it be because nobody is working? Nobody has money to buy the shit they make?
Dont misunderstand me, I'm not sticking up for big business because I think theyre going broke. I understand they're still rich. They have all the money. Rich people are smart that way.
Creating a job is nothing more than an investment. There's no market right now for creating jobs. The excess jobs would be stale money, IMO. There's no return at a certain point.
I didn't say that. I just asked for examples of "government regulations that exist only to drive business away."
In my field stormwater control has been a big issue for the last decade. Regulations increase constantly as we figure out more ways to control and clean the water before releasing it back into our water sources. This creates additional costs for everyone, which are passed on to the customer. It sucks.
The alternative is that we keep releasing water into the ground table that is polluted, in conditions that destroy our streams and bays, kill the wildlife, etc.
So the benefit to society is worth the cost, and possible damage to business. See water purification projects in places like the Chesapeake bay, which provides employment to people who were being pinched because all the wildlife was dying off due to pollution. Or should we remove regulations for people who want to save money and just keep polluting the bay, in turn killing off the population of rockfish and blue crabs who no longer have anywhere clean to live?
Yes it sucks that we have to have all these regulations. The alternative is worse. And the idea that there are tons of regulations that are created with the specific purpose of stifling business is ridiculous.
Sheik
All-Pro
- Messages
- 24,809
- Reaction score
- 5
Business maybe, but not individual wealth.
Youd have to show me something concrete in order for me to believe that.
Yes. But they are not going to employ people for no reason. So it's cyclical. We have to increase demand.
Give more money to the poor and middle class to spend via things like tax breaks. Tax the rich to make up the difference. There are millions of ideas that are good. Tax breaks for the wealthy and deregulation are not one of those good ideas.