Does Government Create Jobs

[H D]

...or do Businesses Create Government.



To say that businesses owe their existence to the government is so perverse and economically ignorant that I can't believe a President of the United States would believe this. There is a from of government that holds that economic view. It is not a representative government with free markets.



See the link for a very simplified version of why I believe a representative government owes its existence to the free market and the taxes and payments it receives from private enterprises.



Sorry for the seemingly political thread. Please don't read it that way. It is an economics thread. I think economic strength is the absolute most important domestic issue. We don't have the luxury of discussing comfort and lifestyle issues if the economy is in the tank.



As a recent college grad, I consider myself lucky to be in the minority of college grads with a job. With 56% of recent grads unemployed, I'm just happy to have a job. I'm getting my second promotion in 4 months and contribute even having a job to the fact that I have worked since I was 14 (by choice and support). My degree was only a hindrance at this point; go figure I'm working on another presumably useless Masters in my spare time. I am underemployed but can go far in the company I'm in. The problem is, I don't enjoy retail. I went to college to help me get a job I would enjoy and support my family with. If I have to just support my family, I'll do it but I think the American dream makes me wish for more than that.



My wife is running her own interior design business on the side of her full time assistant manager position for that jewelry store in every mall. Her business is doing well considering the time commitment she can give it and everything she does and everything we invest into the business is done by us, not our government. It's insulting to say otherwise. It's scary economics when believed by the President.



I know many very talented and intelligent people who are extremely underusing their skills or are told their skills can't be used at this time. That is why the economy matters most to me.

 

[Richard L]

Hugh,

The government does create jobs.....but they are only Government jobs..:grin:



I agree with you 100% that businesses create jobs that feed the government in the form of taxes and fees.



Just look at all the businesses that started out as small business ventures and as they grew, the government stepped in to regulate, tax or implement fees on them. Tobacco, whiskey, oil, gas, coal, Telephones, utilities, cable TV, Banks, Stock Market, vehicles, airlines...etc. The list goes on and on. I don't really know of any legal business that exists today that is entirely free of government regulations, controls, taxes or fees...even to the point of regulating the people who can fill those jobs.



Every legal business has some government restrictions and there are even agencies in Washinton, DC and at the state capitals that have no other mission but to stick their nose into your business, tell you how to run it so they can charge you licensing, taxes or other fees to justify the existence of their agency.



As for the government selling advertising, just look at all those advertisements you get for extended vehicle warranties. Ever wonder where they get your name, address, and the make of auto you have? Simple, your state government sells them that information from their vehicle registrion/title files...It's called Freedom of Information and you cannot block them from selling your information.



....Rich

 

[DaninVa]

The most important thing to remember is that corporations and companies cannot pay taxes. Only people can pay taxes. Companies can send money to the government only by making people pay more for their product or by reducing their profit available to the shareholders. :btddhorse:

 

[Bill V]

The most important thing to remember is that corporations and companies cannot pay taxes. Only people can pay taxes.

That makes no sense. Of course corporations and companies can, and do, pay taxes.

 

[Les]

That makes no sense. Of course corporations and companies can, and do, pay taxes.

BillV, not really, any tax is passed on the consumer. Taxing a corporation will just increase the price of the product.

 

[Gavin Allan]

The customer pays for everything.

 

[Richard L]

Les,

Your statement is not entirely true....There are many situations where companies cannot increase the cost of their products and remain competitive, just like some people cannot increase their income whenever they want to meet new expenses.



Based on your statement, "Taxing a corporation will just increase the price of the product." That logic can apply to almost everyone. Everyone pays the taxes for someone else. Should we also conclude that Employers are paying the taxes for their employees? Taxes are just another operational expense that has to be offset by increasing your income.



Corporations do pay taxes and often cannot just increase the price for their products or services to offset their full tax burden. That's why there are so many loopholes and tax exemptions for corporations written into our tax laws. 99% of the Federal Tax laws are simply endless lists of specific exemptions for unnamed corporations. As and example, you will see things like: "Special Tax Exemptions( for unnamed entities) who signed a mining contract at 2:45PM on 7/1/2010 in Denver, CO to conduct copper mining operations in a very specific region of Nevada between specific dates, etc." The laws do not specify companies by name and are written to appear as though anyone is eligible for that tax exemption, but the details are very specific so that only one entity qualifies and the government does not reveal the name of the company or corporate entity.



Unless you knew more of that specific tax exemption, the average person would never know the company/corporation getting the tax exemption for that mining operation?



The point is that if Corporation do not pay taxes, it would not need all these tax exemptions, it would simply raise the cost of it's products....It just does not work that way and it is an oversimplification of some very complex issues made more complex by our tax laws.



All of this is just Political Class Warfare. Point your finger of blame to another group to divert attention away from you.



Democrats always blame the rich and big business, but are quick to take money from them to support their campaign.



Republicans are quick to blame the liberal tax and spend philosophy that taxes the rich and gives to the poor or lazy.



The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. And until we can get these extremist view out of our political system, we will continue to relive these same opposing philosophies and nothing will ever change.



...Rich

 

[Gavin Allan]

We need the Fair Tax for so many good reasons...

 

[H D]

The Fair Tax would fix a lot of issues in this country and not necessarily just raising revenue or curbing tax evasion. Any candidate from any party that shows a history of supporting the Fair Tax and would promise to make it legislative priority #1 would get my vote. They could support any number of other issues I would disagree with but if they promised me the Fair Tax, I'd support them.



Instead, we play the class warfare game...or the war game. Real leadership with real solutions: maybe 2016.

:banghead:

 

[Richard L]

The concept of a "Fair Tax" is more of a myth than reality. Somebody will always feel that any tax is an "Unfair" tax to them. Any tax system will have some exemptions and that's the root of all the Unfairness of any tax system. If some pay all their taxes, but others are given partial or full tax exemptions for whatever reason, you generate class warfare.



The other issue is that we will never have anything approximating a "Fair Tax" without a complete change of our political system and that is not likely to happen anytime soon.



To change our political system we need to eliminate and even ban political parties. Every candidate stands on his own merits without the financial backing of a political party nor campaign contributions. We need to take the Money out of politics.



Congressional and Senate offices will only be limited to one term in a lifetime. The President is allowed 2 terms maximum. If a candidate already holds an elected office, they must complete that term or position before they can be a candidate for any other political office. Without the elimination of political parties and term limits, there will never be any change.



Candidates may not except corporate or private donations to their election campaign and cannot use their own money to finance their campaign. All campaign financing will be paid from a government fund and shared equally among all legal candidates. This will reduce the ability for big money to influence campaign financing and political favors. The candidates are allotted an equal share of the campaign funds that will be paid directly by the government.



Any easy way to conduct primaries would be to have people vote by phone like American Idol, or America's got talen immediately after the candidates debatet. That would be used to narrow down the list of candidates very quickly to the top 2 or 3 who would continue with their campaigns and others would be dropped from the list of candidates and their campaign fund account would be closed.



Will this ever happen? Probably not in my lifetime or yours, because is is fair and not based on money or fund raising. Remember that Political Parties are just another Special Interest Group, like Lobbyist, and various corporations, Unions, and Religious factions.



...Rich

 

[Gavin Allan]

Political parties are just PEOPLE, just like lobbiests, corporations, unions, religious factions, and Sport Trac fan sites.

 

[Richard L]

Gavin,

Yes, they are all people, but they are also special interest groups. When a small group of people control the money and the political power, it no longer is a government for the people, by the people, but becomes a government only motivated by money and power.



80 percent of the American public are middle of the road moderates with some libral views and conservative views on different issues. However, the two main political parties are extreme liberals or extreme conservatives...and there is no middle ground where 80% of the American voters are. Candidates will often campaign as if they are very moderate to attract as many of the moderate voters, but once they get elected they follow their parties philosophy and become extremely liberal ore extremely conservative.



Until we get the money and extremism out of politics, we will never have have a "Fair Tax".



...Rich

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I live in a pretty upscale township of a somewhat elite county of PA, and mention that not to brag but to set the stage for my rant. Our township pus out a nice, glossy, quarterly newsletter with township and local government concers stated within. Sometime last year this newsletter started to be as sponsored, with a lot of contactor, realtor, landscaper, restaurant and other business ads. I was kind of ticked, what with the potential conflict of interest.



This township already shakes down corporations and developers trying to move in, asking for large donations to open space funds, with donations voluntary.... Yeah right.



Now they are in bed with local businesses that subsidize the propaganda rag.



WTF!



TJR

 

[Richard L]

TJR,

That sounds like Bucks County PA? :angry:



I was a Hospital Software Consultant for Doylestown hospital for about 9 months...What a bunch of nuts. :banghead:



...Rich

 

[TrainTrac]

Our township pus out a nice, glossy, quarterly newsletter with township and local government concers stated within. Sometime last year this newsletter started to be as sponsored, with a lot of contactor, realtor, landscaper, restaurant and other business ads. I was kind of ticked, what with the potential conflict of interest.

Are you more upset that they solicit sponsorship of this newsletter from private businesses, or that the newsletter is published in general? Were you against the publishing of this newsletter when it was paid for with tax-payer dollars too? Just curious...



Also, when I first read your post about this, TJR, I thought it was a little off-topic. But when I pondered it a little more, I realized it was dead-on. By contracting out the publication of the newsletter, your township gov't is creating private-sector jobs!:grin:

 

[Bill V]

BillV, not really, any tax is passed on the consumer. Taxing a corporation will just increase the price of the product.

Not necessarily. If the market environment won't allow for such an increase, it won't happen. Similarly, if the market will allow a price increase, the prices will increase, regardless of whether it's to cover taxes or simply to increase the profit margin. The two aren't necessarily linked directly to each other. Economics 101.

 

[Frank screwyourednecks]

The only job creator is demand.



You want to make money. You start business. You want to expand business. You hire employees. Job created. BY DEMAND. If noone wants your product. You cannot expand, therefore you cannot employ anyone. Job creator-Demand. Not some ceo. Not companies. And certainly not government. If people want or need a product. They will buy it. Look at gas prices.





I have spoken

It is written

 

[Thomas Rogers]

TrainTrac,



I have no problem with the newsletter. A well informed citizenry is a good thing. My issue is that it is ad sponsored. How can a township that is run by elected citizens be totally unbiased (or at least to be perceived to be without question) in their dealings with local companies with respect to zoning, permits, regulations, etc, when SOME of thos companies are subsidizing the efforts of the township? To be specific, am I supposed to think that if two different companies submit bids for some landscaping work for the township and one of the companies is a sponsor and the other is not that such won't weigh on the decision?



As for being on or off topic, this is pretty much on-topic as our government and business are far too co-mingled in this country. The foundation of the debate of whether or not govt begets corps, or corps beget govt couldn't and wouldn't exist if not for the very closely connected nature of govt and corps...it is NOT healthy. It is NOT what our country was founded on.



Oh, RichardL, Bucks Co, through and through. Hilltown Township.



TJR

 

[Richard L]

Frank,

Surprisingly, you are correct about Demand creating jobs, but it is up to the businesses to create that demand. Also, there are some businesses, products and services that are always needed regardless of the economic situations. That would be things like Food, Medical Care, and Funeral Services, to name a few and various forms of energy is always needed.



Also, cities still must collect garbage, mail must be delivered, water and utilities must still be available to the public. Schools must still operate, and Federal, State and City governments must continue to operate and provide services like the Military, Police, Fire Fighters, etc.



The problem has always been that all Businesses look at FTEs (Full time Employees) as expendable. Whenever a company needs to cut expenses the first and easiest expense to eliminate is employees.



This often starts a vicious circle where the employees who get laid-off are those who directly service and support the customers, exactly who they need to keep... a strong customer base. With less employees, there is often less customer support and the customer notices this and soon becomes dissatisfied with the product or the lack of service and stops using that business. Thus customers are lost which is exacly what the company did not need, and the company starts that downhill slide.



If businesses would think smarter and lay-off the upper level management and cut some of the executive perks, they might even be able to reduce the cost of their products or services and build a larger customer base. It's just a matter of being creative and thinking outside the box. But I fear they are only motivated by the immediate results and rarely look at what the future will bring.



Just my opinion.



Rich

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Richard L,



I'm half-way through watching the movie "Moneyball" and your points above made me think of the movie. Often times employers hire and retain the wrong types of people and/or compensate them inappropriately. An employee should be viewed by an employer as a value proposition and they should be paid on the value they bring to the company, PERIOD.



So, folks, as YOU (not the government) go on to make your own business and create jobs, remember to figure out a way to compensate based on actual value provided.



TJR