Where the GOP goes from here
A business owner with more money is going to make more capital investment in order to grow and increase profitability. This is exactly what creates jobs. It's also the most effective means of increasing tax revenue long term, since it's real job creation rather than job reallocation.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
That job creators thing is BS. It's presupposing that jobs will be created if we throw more money to owners. Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
Letting people keep their earnings is throwing money at them?
Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
And... who employs 80% of the work force? Putting intentions aside, who employs people in general...
Their confidence is not very high, Obama is not very confidence inspiring. Stop blaming businesses for the tax reality they have to put up with.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
A business owner with more money is going to make more capital investment in order to grow and increase profitability. This is exactly what creates jobs. It's also the most effective means of increasing tax revenue long term, since it's real job creation rather than job reallocation.
Yes, I know this argument. That was the presupposition I was talking about. There is not only one thing that a business owner can do with more money. Free will being what it is, there are alternatives.
That job creators thing is BS. It's presupposing that jobs will be created if we throw more money to owners. Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
Letting people keep their earnings is throwing money at them?
Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
And... who employs 80% of the work force? Putting intentions aside, who employs people in general...
Their confidence is not very high, Obama is not very confidence inspiring. Stop blaming businesses for the tax reality they have to put up with.
So now you're going to veer off the road to the "When was the last time you got a job from a poor person?" argument. You said that the language we use to frame things creates our reality. Can you agree that job creator presupposes that creating jobs is a business owners primary concern?
Confidence inspiring? So this is all about feeling good rather than a grounded in concrete circumstance assessment of what owners will do with their money.
Here's my opinion, as a libertarian leaning republican.
1.) They've got to embrace the liberty movement. Young conservatives tend to be economic conservatives. We don't care if our gay friends are marrying, but we do care if we are working 40 hours a week and the govt is wasting our money.
2.) Figure out how to control and remove people who have ignorant views on rape or anything else. As much as Romney tried to focus on the economy, he didn't get the help he needed from the other races. It's ok to be pro-life, but saying that women have natural defenses against "legit" rape? WTF? They also need to understand that even a lot of pro-life people are uncomfortable with forcing rape victims to have the baby, and then deal with the potential issue of the rapist trying to be in the kids life.
3.) Get with Newt Gingrich on immigration. He had a real plan to offer a path to citizenship for those who wanted to work and be good citizens.
True. At some point though, people need to take off the rose colored glasses and see the truth about Obama.
So now you're going to veer off the road to the "When was the last time you got a job from a poor person?" argument. You said that the language we use to frame things creates our reality. Can you agree that job creator presupposes that creating jobs is a business owners primary concern?
.
The primary concern of a business person is profit and return on investment. If a capitalist could produce his line of products with invisible pixies who do not require a wage, he would do it in a flash. The purpose of business is profit, not creating jobs. When production becomes fully automated, we shall see how many jobs there are.
But here is the paradox. If products can be made without labor who is going to buy them? If no wages are paid, will there be enough monetary demand to clear the market of products made? Probably not. What will happen is that a second class of robots will be created that consumes the goods that the first class of robots produced.
ruveyn
So now you're going to veer off the road to the "When was the last time you got a job from a poor person?" argument. You said that the language we use to frame things creates our reality. Can you agree that job creator presupposes that creating jobs is a business owners primary concern?
.
The primary concern of a business person is profit and return on investment. If a capitalist could produce his line of products with invisible pixies who do not require a wage, he would do it in a flash. The purpose of business is profit, not creating jobs. When production becomes fully automated, we shall see how many jobs there are.
But here is the paradox. If products can be made without labor who is going to buy them? If no wages are paid, will there be enough monetary demand to clear the market of products made? Probably not. What will happen is that a second class of robots will be created that consumes the goods that the first class of robots produced.
ruveyn
Yes, you got it. That was where my argument was heading.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
That job creators thing is BS. It's presupposing that jobs will be created if we throw more money to owners. Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
Letting people keep their earnings is throwing money at them?
Business owners will only make jobs if they have to in order to create more profit. That's it.
And... who employs 80% of the work force? Putting intentions aside, who employs people in general...
Their confidence is not very high, Obama is not very confidence inspiring. Stop blaming businesses for the tax reality they have to put up with.
So now you're going to veer off the road to the "When was the last time you got a job from a poor person?" argument. You said that the language we use to frame things creates our reality. Can you agree that job creator presupposes that creating jobs is a business owners primary concern?
Confidence inspiring? So this is all about feeling good rather than a grounded in concrete circumstance assessment of what owners will do with their money.
I'm saying that you shouldn't be judging intentions, which is what every leftists do. You should be judging results. If the Government does a great job an engine of growth and thus a provider of jobs, then the Government should take on that role.
You should only be judging results. Results should be the only thing that matters, not "Did you mean well."
Businesses are in a shady environment, they need to know future investments will not go to waste, and if the climate goes south and they loose even more of their sure-footing that is keeping them afloat through these rough times, that they will have a comfy enough cushion to deal with the losses.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
Yes, private enterprise is the best engine for employment. You have to look at intentions when it comes to the job creators meme because that's where the hiring, the job growth is being done. It is only a belief that more money to business owners will be an influence in job creation. There is a plethora of different things that a business owner may decide to do with more money. This job creators meme is just more of the same abstract, economic theory that presupposes a rational person with perfect knowledge of the market.
The present now really is no indicator of the future. The right was declaring the left dead when Bush won reelection and the left did the same of the right after 06/08 landslide years. The the GOP storms back in 2010 and but gets brushed back in 2012. It's a 2 party system and it goes back and forth. 2014 will likely be a strong GOP year is history is any indicator and 2016 will be a completely different race all over.
The present now really is no indicator of the future. The right was declaring the left dead when Bush won reelection and the left did the same of the right after 06/08 landslide years. The the GOP storms back in 2010 and but gets brushed back in 2012. It's a 2 party system and it goes back and forth. 2014 will likely be a strong GOP year is history is any indicator and 2016 will be a completely different race all over.
Yes. An open race. Both people running we be out-cumbants.
ruveyn
