Quote:
Originally Posted by mookiemookie
Demand creates jobs. Taxes on entrepreneurs can be lowered to zero and they can all open factories but if there's no one to buy the output, it does nothing. Until the right realizes this, their economics are just as head-shakingly wrong as the left's.
The top 1% may buy a 50 yachts and Maybachs a year, but it's the much larger middle class that buys 100,000 Chevys and 36" TVs - which one creates more jobs? The 50 products or the 100,000?
Demand creates jobs. Not handouts to the rich.
Unless Obama's in office, then it's like "OMG things aren't better RIGHT NOW!"
|
2 things here Mookie.
First - your right - demand does create jobs - however - there isn't a question of demand - we are a consumer nation. The problem is people don't have jobs to be able to create demand - so when jobs are created (by investors) - demand also rises.
Now - as for the "OMG" comment - Obama stated he had to turn the economy around or else he would be a 1 term president. His words - and so far he has failed. Now - the thing is that one must look at WHY he has failed - and WHY the transition hasn't started yet. Obama's policies - more government spending (inefficient), increased debt, a desire to tax investors and small business at higher rates - has kept the economy from recovery. Now - the bailouts were NOT just Obama's fault - Bush holds blame there too. The QE's have killed any forward growth - so both sides share blame. However, Obama's policies of more regulation, more taxation, more spending - have failed to provide any impetus for the economy to move. This is - per his own stated standard - what makes him a "failure" on the economy.
Now - before you start talking unemployment numbers, look at the reality - the job pool has shrunk massively, people are dropping of even looking for work - not only because jobs are still hard to come by, but also because BOTH sides are sitting there handing out more and more unemployment checks. Why would people look for a job when they can get paid to sit on their tails at home? A lot of people WON'T. Others have lost everything because they have tried - for years - and can't find anything.
If X equals the "worker pool" and y equals the number of jobs, z is the unemployment rate. x/y=z
When you increase y slightly, but decrease x significantly, z becomes smaller. The "rate" goes down, but only because there are less workers. Less workers is not a good thing....
CNN quoted David Gewirtz as saying the US needed 2 million jobs created a year. That means just to keep up with population growth, we need 166.7K jobs a month minimum. Using the Bureau of Labor and statistics, 243k jobs were created in January 2012. This brings the unemployment rate down a full .2% according to their numbers. Sounds good - but when you read the full report - the actual decrease is not due to the ~78k job surplus (which 78k jobs is not anywhere NEAR enough to drop the unemployment rate .2%), but its because over 2 MILLION more people dropped out of the "labor pool"!
Anyone can point to the "decrease" in unemployment as a good thing - and it would be - but if you plugged the 2M+ people in - the rate would be significantly HIGHER - and climbing. Ignoring numbers the administration doesn't like to keep them out of the formula is just dishonest, and isn't anything to base a "recovery" arguement on. If the administration thinks it is - they are in for a huge shock in November.