Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 131

Thread: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

  1. #121
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    Spin it how you want
    I'm not spinning anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    but it's not 100% about demand.
    I never said it was. I claim only that demand is more fundamental than supply.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    Sometimes, someone creates a product and sells it. Was there a demand for chia pets?
    No, and there never has been. There's a demand for things that entertain. People bought chia pets because they're entertaining.

    What people with your view cannot explain is this: if there is demand for specific products, why are products superseded? Chia pets are still around. People bought them, so there clearly was demand for them (assuming for a moment there can be demand for products). If there was demand for chia pets as such, where'd it go? On my view, the demand was for things that entertain, and when chia pets were no longer entertaining, people stopped buying them.
    Last edited by ashurbanipal; 11-02-14 at 12:13 PM.

  2. #122
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515
    As evidenced in my previous post, it's obvious your opinion on the issue is such that you will invent whatever view that is necessary to support your position and the larger agenda behind the demand meme. You're all over the place with your statements as you attempt to support your understanding of demand and how it is created, and have gone as far as to counter your own points as you go.
    If any of that were true, it would be easy for you to show it. You'd be able to answer the questions I posed with reasonable replies I couldn't answer. You'd be able to go back through my posts and show where I made one claim, and then its negation later. Instead, you've stopped engaging, and now you're just slinging ad hominems.

  3. #123
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    the high desert
    Last Seen
    01-10-15 @ 11:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,337

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    No, my point is more subtle but also entirely practical. Businesses without customers are dead, and customers are people with demands and the ability to pay for them. If we want a virtuous economic cycle, then we need policies that encourage people to have demands, and that protect their ability to pay for them. We've done ****-poor on this last bit for well-nigh 50 years, and now we're seeing the results.

    The same pattern has played out again and again throughout history. When too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, one of two things happens: immediate collapse, or protracted tyranny protected by force, and then collapse. The solution is simple: rebalance wealth, and then keep it in balance.
    Rebalance wealth? That seems like a different subject altogether. I think you mean take money out of rich peoples bank accounts and pass it out like Halloween candy to the poor so they will spend it. That would be a very short term bubble that would burst as the rich we're bleed dry

  4. #124
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort
    Rebalance wealth? That seems like a different subject altogether. I think you mean take money out of rich peoples bank accounts and pass it out like Halloween candy to the poor so they will spend it. That would be a very short term bubble that would burst as the rich we're bleed dry
    No, that's not what I want to do. I think it would be better to make policies which help inflate the middle class, and incomes generally for people in the lower 98% or 95% of the population, and which brings the wealth and income gap back into something like the proportions they had in the 1950's or early 1960's.

  5. #125
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,145

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    No, my point is more subtle but also entirely practical. Businesses without customers are dead, and customers are people with demands and the ability to pay for them. If we want a virtuous economic cycle, then we need policies that encourage people to have demands, and that protect their ability to pay for them. We've done ****-poor on this last bit for well-nigh 50 years, and now we're seeing the results.

    The same pattern has played out again and again throughout history. When too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, one of two things happens: immediate collapse, or protracted tyranny protected by force, and then collapse.
    The solution is simple: rebalance wealth, and then keep it in balance.
    no. it is NOT a simple solution. at least not a simple one to achieve
    your 'solution' would require those who have amassed significant wealth to relinquish it for the benefit of those who have little/no wealth

    if this were to be accomplished, share with us how you would then maintain that balance of wealth
    my expectation is that most of those without wealth but who acquired assets by unearned gift would soon lose that newfound currency
    without a change in one's underlying behavior, such as absence of motivation, taking actions towards immediate gratification rather than a willingness to await delayed gratification, and a general ignorance of asset management, would return those recipients to the positions they are in today
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  6. #126
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    If any of that were true, it would be easy for you to show it. You'd be able to answer the questions I posed with reasonable replies I couldn't answer. You'd be able to go back through my posts and show where I made one claim, and then its negation later. Instead, you've stopped engaging, and now you're just slinging ad hominems.
    Example: You posted a question that suggests I didn't think people liked to enjoy things before NASCAR. What a load. I have no interest in wasting time with someone so completely full of BS that they would post such a contrived and lame question.

    Another example: In the example of automobiles, you completely sidestep the fact they were initially banned from public roads and use in cites for some undefinable standard that people were demanding "unfussy" travel? If that were true, why were they banned from use?

    A final example, and then I'm done: You posted "there aren't demands for specific products just as such. There is demand for the product which best fills a need" There is no demand for products, but there is demand for products if they fill a need. Either there is demand, or there isn't. This is especially true is they don't even know they have a need for a product.

    Again, I could go on, but you're so wedded to the living wage/increase pay and all will be well meme, that it's rather pointless to continue.

  7. #127
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,864
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    Well, it's logically possible that people could exist and want absolutely nothing. So in that sense, of course, you're correct. However, it seems to be the nature of human beings to want some things. A person whose belly is full of food today will be hungry tomorrow. A person who is healthy today will be ill and require medicine tomorrow. A person who needs no shelter because it's a nice temperate day will one day be in blazing heat, pouring rain, or freezing cold. And so on.

    No, there would still be demands. Everyone would just be satisfying their own demand.
    And if a person is 100% self-sufficient, he won't want much of anything. If he wants it, he'll provide it for himself. Conversely, if someone provides 100% of the desires of a person, that person wants for nothing and won't represent a demand.

    True, they are both theoretical extreme boundary conditions, and not likely to exist in the real world, much less our society as it's currently structured. We agree on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    Then ask yourself this: would any business (that actually stays in business for very long) create a job to fill a demand which wasn't there? Would any business (that actually stays in business for very long) create a job to fill a demand for which people couldn't possibly pay enough to create profit? And what happens to businesses that flout those rules?
    Other parts of the business would have to end up paying for the parts that aren't providing value proportional to their expense. Kinda how the UAW jobs bank works? Maybe?

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    Again, I get that (at least in our economic model) business is what goes about filling the demand. And this isn't all. Businesses are what "spin up" demands (plural) from subsistence level economies to industrial and post-industrial economies such as the one we enjoy.
    So long as we have such a thing as private ownership (not something with which I want to do away), we'd be foolish to not allow business to thrive. But in fact, one principle effect of taking my point seriously is that businesses should begin to thrive more, because they'll have more customers with more money to spend.
    No argument here. The more customers which are buying represent more demand that business will compete to fulfill. It's the spiral upward that we all want to enjoy and participate in. Further, as demand for employees increases in business, the more each of those jobs will be compensated, especially the highly skilled and educated jobs, but all jobs in general.

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    I think at least some of what I've said is in rough agreement with this notion. However, sometimes theory is rather important. Theories that are tolerably accurate can tell us what to do when something goes wrong. And that's the kind of point I'm making. We shouldn't be so confused about what has gone wrong in our economy. We need to take direct steps to help there be more customers with the ability to pay for their demands. Do that, and we'll get back in a virtuous cycle. Do it not, and we'll keep swirling around the rim of another vicious cycle.
    We we agree that both demand and jobs are part of both the virtuous cycle and the vicious cycle.

    Gee, I'm glad that you came around to my way of thinking on this.
    Naa, just pulling your leg. I think we've both moved towards each other on this. A sign of a successful discussion I'm thinking.
    Disinformation campaign? The Russian collusion meme pushed by the 'news' media, behaving as a political propaganda organ, hell bent to destroy a legitimately elected president to implement his agenda per the votes of the same electorate. Reference The Big Lie Reference Goebbels

  8. #128
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by Justabubba
    no. it is NOT a simple solution. at least not a simple one to achieve
    Oh, sure. I was talking about the simplicity of realizing what the solution is, not how difficult it would be to implement. In fact, I don't have any hope that anything like what I would suggest would be implemented in this country for many years, if ever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justabubba
    if this were to be accomplished, share with us how you would then maintain that balance of wealth
    I'd start by returning to the tax structure (roughly speaking) present in the early 1960's. Top marginal rates on earned income were around 50%, which I think is correct. I'd also probably introduce pay-gap policies, and also policies limiting work hours.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justabubba
    my expectation is that most of those without wealth but who acquired assets by unearned gift would soon lose that newfound currency
    without a change in one's underlying behavior, such as absence of motivation, taking actions towards immediate gratification rather than a willingness to await delayed gratification, and a general ignorance of asset management, would return those recipients to the positions they are in today
    Greed is a great beast. It can drive an economy, but it must be yoked and carefully observed and controlled. It can never really be tamed. Adam Smith had a great deal to say about this. One thing he said which tends to surprise people who have not read The Wealth of Nations is that prices of products should be subject to supply and demand, but wages should be regulated so as to be as near as possible to what he called the "liberal reward of labor"--which is exactly equivalent to the sum total value of the productivity of an average worker. I think he more or less got it right. Business should be restricted to make a reasonable profit (I think 10% is a good target), and the rest should go into the hands of the workers in accord to the value they produce. Everyone has an incentive to work hard, there's steady economic expansion through business profit, and people are paid fairly. I can't see what's not to like about such a setup.

  9. #129
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515
    Example: You posted a question that suggests I didn't think people liked to enjoy things before NASCAR. What a load. I have no interest in wasting time with someone so completely full of BS that they would post such a contrived and lame question.
    There's nothing contrived or lame about it. My position has been and continues to be that a demand exists before products or services are made, but that the demand is a general one. So, products or services for which there come to be demands are only so because they satisfy the more basic demand. If that's true, then demand is more fundamental than supply, and if we want an economy with a virtuous cycle, we should nurture demand, and the ability of people to pay for products that fill them, first.

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515
    Another example: In the example of automobiles, you completely sidestep the fact they were initially banned from public roads and use in cites for some undefinable standard that people were demanding "unfussy" travel? If that were true, why were they banned from use?
    For a variety of reasons mainly having to do with concerns about how to regulate their use, as I understand it, anyway. I don't know what you're going for here. Again, it looks to me like this supports my view, not yours. Regulations against automobiles prevented them from entering the marketplace. Unless there were a pre-existing demand, there doesn't seem to be any social force available to overturn those regulations.

    Conversely, the fact that there are regulations against something in no way signifies a lack of demand for it. I'm sure plenty of people would love to own slaves, for example. There are still enough people who are so racist that they wouldn't have any moral qualms about owning other human beings. So the laws against slavery don't entail there's not an extant demand. By parity of reasoning, then, the fact that there were regulations against automobiles doesn't entail that there wasn't demand for them (be careful reading this part--I'm not saying there was demand for automobiles as such, only that your example doesn't show there wasn't, and the reason it doesn't show that also precludes it showing there was no general demand such as I've been talking about).

    Anyway, I didn't sidestep this point. I answered it directly in a previous post.

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515
    A final example, and then I'm done: You posted "there aren't demands for specific products just as such. There is demand for the product which best fills a need" There is no demand for products, but there is demand for products if they fill a need. Either there is demand, or there isn't. This is especially true is they don't even know they have a need for a product.
    Demand exists. Demand is for any product that has some set of properties. Had people made hovercraft before automobiles, or made some other invention altogether with relevantly similar properties, that's what would have taken off. Demand isn't for automobiles, but for any product that has properties sufficiently similar to automobiles. This is why it would be plausible for someone to invent something right now that has all the plusses of an automobile, and slightly fewer minuses, and in an ideal market, automobiles would be replaced. There isn't demand for automobiles per se, but rather, for some product that does what automobiles do.

    The same point applies to NASCAR, or any other product.
    Last edited by ashurbanipal; 11-02-14 at 04:11 PM.

  10. #130
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,857

    Re: Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger
    Other parts of the business would have to end up paying for the parts that aren't providing value proportional to their expense. Kinda how the UAW jobs bank works? Maybe?
    I think ultimately such businesses would fail. Smart business owners start companies to fill demands that already exist. Their products and services may go on to create new demands, certainly. But the initial demand must exist first so revenues start accruing shortly after production begins, and those in turn pay for further production.

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger
    No argument here. The more customers which are buying represent more demand that business will compete to fulfill. It's the spiral upward that we all want to enjoy and participate in. Further, as demand for employees increases in business, the more each of those jobs will be compensated, especially the highly skilled and educated jobs, but all jobs in general.
    Yes, I think that's right.

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger
    We we agree that both demand and jobs are part of both the virtuous cycle and the vicious cycle.
    Again, correct. The only thing I would add is that demand is more fundamental, and so is more important. But in practical terms, while I think paying attention to the demand side is how to get an economy going, I reiterate that its a big mistake to go full-on socialist and forget about nurturing business. There has to be a balance, and once it's acheived, it has to be zealously guarded. But if it can be acheived, it means peace and prosperity for everyone, or nearly so.

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger
    Naa, just pulling your leg. I think we've both moved towards each other on this. A sign of a successful discussion I'm thinking.
    A rarity on DP, I'm afraid. I appreciate your reasonable response.

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •