Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Who Are The Real Job Creators?

September 26, 2012 by  

So just who are the real job creators? The answer to that might surprise you, but first things first.

Contemporary usage has twisted the meaning of the term “job creator” into a full-fledged misnomer; there really is no such thing. You see, in a literal sense, jobs are not created. Unlike productive people who actually create things, it’s absurd to think of a so-called “job creator” sitting down at his desk somewhere, scheming how to best create jobs by hiring people. Besides putting the proverbial cart before the horse, it just doesn’t happen that way in the real world.

For a few years now, the mainstream media have been bloviating non-stop about unemployment and “job creation,” and I’ve wanted to illustrate how nonsensical and overused this grade-school bromide has become. Because of the general public’s preference for simple-minded language and easy-to-understand answers to complicated economic issues, the term is just one of many that have been reshaped into Orwellian doubletalk, especially by politicians. Naturally, most con artists prefer to use these “tools of the trade” to help keep their constituents confused, bewildered and dumbed down. But it’s even worse than that. I often hear many free-market advocates using these same mind-numbing clichés when arguing their case.

Lately, politicians and media pundits have been fostering a storybook fantasy about how some very smart people (George Soros/Warren Buffett types come to mind) are feverishly working around the clock, stamping out newly created job schemes designed to help out the needy, downtrodden masses. And amazingly, many of the economically naïve seem to buy into this notion. Obviously, it’s pure crap.

Most people understand that government doesn’t “create jobs” in the private sector… and that goes for businesses, too. What’s that? You heard me: Private enterprises don’t “create jobs” either. In a free country the “market” creates jobs. Therefore, and contrary to modern-day Keynesian claptrap, the act of hiring someone does not qualify you as “job creator.” Employing people, whether briefly or for the long term, is simply a means to an end and a way of satisfying your desire and the market’s demand for more labor. Jobs readily come into existence if there is demand for them by those who need them. So we finally have the answer to just who the “real job-creator” is. It’s Adam Smith’s “invisible hand.”

Now, if you still feel the need to bestow the title of “job creator” on somebody, then it should go to those who seldom get recognized or even care: customers. Do you ever wonder why you hear businesspeople say things like “the customer is always right,” “our customers come first” or “the customer is king”? “Customers” (aka “consumers” — another co-opted and overused cliché) are the real driving force behind the demand and need for additional workers. Hence, it’s more appropriate to give them credit. And if you concede that point, then you have to admit that everyone’s a job creator: you, me and the kid next door, for that matter (he likes stuff, too). But don’t look for a headline in next month’s issue of TIME or Newsweek announcing “We’re all Job Creators Now!” (though that’s not a terrible idea).

One of the many false and idiotic portrayals put forth by liberals is that businesses’ main concern should be some societal obligation and responsibility to hire employees — the more, the better — for the good of all. Business owners certainly provide an atmosphere that allows the employment process to occur; so, yes, they deserve some credit. But they never hire anyone based on benevolent ideals or a fiduciary duty to do so. Unfortunately, many businesspeople help perpetuate this lunacy by saying things like, “Look, I have a business; I’m a job creator.” Nonsense! You might as well call your local news reporter next time you need your lawn mowed: “Quick, come to my house and watch me create a job; I’m hiring my neighbor’s kid.” Statements like these show economic ignorance and a shameful penchant for public pandering. Like most human endeavors, employers hire people for one prominent reason: They benefit from it.

Some may now be asking the inevitable question, “Can’t government help the employment situation by passing new laws?” The answer to that is an emphatic “no.” Despite its supposed good intentions, government should not try to artificially force the unemployment rate down because every action it takes only interferes and disrupts the economy, thereby increasing unemployment. The right thing for government to do is simply get the heck out of the way. Repealing all of its job-killing legislation enacted over the years is the only real positive action it can take, and for me that starts with the repeal of the Wagner Act of 1935.

Finally, please do yourself a favor and quit using those phony convoluted terms created by liberals, statists and lowlifes in the MSM. It only gives them the home-field advantage.

Stephan Foli

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Who Are The Real Job Creators?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • GALT

    That was going pretty well………but then blows up at the end which explains the “special
    to personal liberty” tag……….and the “free market” bloviating…..to reach an incorrect
    ( inconsistent ) conclusion.

    So let’s concede that demand “creates” jobs…….or a need for labor which either can
    not be or is not required or desired to be performed by the potential employer. We
    will skip over nature of the demand ( hit man, mercenary, illegal toxic waste disposal, crack dealer… ) because we are dealing with the perfect ( cherry picked ) “free market” economics mythology.

    We then make the proper adjustment for Smith …….excerpt from Econned.

    “In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations. In it he argued that the uncoordinated actions of large numbers of individuals, each acting out of self interest, sometimes produced , as if by “an invisible hand,”results that were beneficial to broader society. Smith also pointed out that self interested actions frequently led to injustice or even ruin. He fiercely criticized both how employers colluded with each other to keep wages low, as well as the ” savage injustice ” that European mercantilist interests had “commited with impunity” in colonies in Asia and the Americas.”

    We are still on track……….demand creates jobs.

    Now we have to ask, what is the source of the Keynesian crap…….since keynes is
    not actually taught or cherry picked…….but an “interpretation” is……..so are you quoting Keynes, or the interpretation, or your mythology regarding him?

    But we are still on track………demand creates jobs.

    Which brings us to “We are all job creators, now.”………..absolutely correct STILL.

    “The right thing for government to do is simply get the heck out of the way. ”

    Sorry…….but you “can’t get there, from here”!!!!!!!

    “we are all….” is inclusive……..and only true if there is absolutely NO DEMAND for
    anything that “government” does……….( good luck with that……because once YOU
    concede that the nature of “demand” can be anything and is not necessarily
    beneficial, you now have a demand for “government” jobs…….oops.)

    So thank you for pointing out that………..Demand creates jobs!!!!!!!!!!!

    You could have done that fairly quickly……and in the sense that it is a “correction”
    for Orwellian “double speak”…….welcome to the FIGHT. ( and good luck with
    getting anyone to stick to it )

    Which brings us again to the “primary question”……

    Is “government” or “corrupt government” the problem?

    Unfortunately, actually getting to that question requires dismantling “mythologies” and
    a lot “more doublespeak”……….and are to be congratulated for your contribution here…
    but you need a lot more work………..

    ” To conquer, first DIVIDE!!!!! ” ( and then HANG, separately. )

    • Honestly

      to GALT…a lot of words that mean NOTHING!!!!!!!

      • GALT

        Thank your cogent analysis…..fittingly accompanied by your choice of moniker,
        which like the author’s rather simplistic attempt at argument, requires a
        GREAT DEAL more thought.

        • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

          Galt, You correctly point out that what liberal college professors say is Keynesian was not really what Keyens believed. He only believed in deficit spending long enough to end a recession or resolve a national crisis. We have been deficit spending about 30 out of the last 35 years. Keyens would never agree with approach.

          Job bgrowth increases by allowing the private sector to grow, not stealing from it to keep growing government.

      • GALT

        Bruce……..you are simply restating the false conclusion of the author……without
        responding to the argument that demonstrates his error……..

        Does government have a “legitimate purpose of ANY kind?

        If the answer is yes……then government creates jobs because there is a DEMAND
        for government……….

        Which brings you to the second question. Is the problem government or corrupt government?

        How you respond to that will lead you the solution required. ( or expose your perceived
        self interest and or understanding of the actually REALITY and scope of the problem
        and your intellectual ability to comprehend it as well as determine the proper means of
        resolution. )

        Whatever you decide…… this:

        ““The right thing for government to do is simply get the heck out of the way. ”

        Is NOT the SOLUTION!!!!!!!!

        • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

          Galt, I am a Republican and not a Libertarian, I believe that the government has some valid functions and that we should not completely eliminate government. The Constitution, of course, requires that the government provide national defense, deal with foreign countries and regulate interstate commerce.

          The government has done some good things. It is because of the government that we have the interstate highway system, that waterways are maintained to ensure that we have access to ports and can participate in foreign trade. Social Security and Medicare are both good programs even though thay need adjustments to remain viable.

          What is not good is our hugh tax code that could be simplified or even eliminated and moved to the fair tax. The large number of industrial and enviromental regulations can be streamlined to help industry. the Ryan/Romney plans will go a long way to getting government out of the way of private industry.

          As far as the FED goes, some things such as QE3 are bad. The FED should stay out of that. As a banker though I have to agree that there are good reasons to have the FED. There is a need to provide overnight capital to banks to prevent them from lacking operating capital from day to day. What if you could not make a withdrawl because your bank lacked liquidity?

          I think the government should have a lesser role, i do not think that we would be better off without it.

      • Vicki

        Governments “job” is very simple and direct. This video explains what that job is.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY Start at 5:30 into the video if you don’t have time to watch the whole 10 min.

        Our Constitution lays out the enumerated things the Federal Government in particular is allowed to do.

        • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

          Vicki, This video is so true and I see our government moving the direction of Rome. I see a large number among the 49% who receive some type of government benefit support those who will give them more. I also see the current administration try to make government of men rather than laws. They want what they want even if it violates the Constitution.

          I think we can still reverse the trend and again have a government that is the right size. If we do not recerse it in the next four years then we will be past the tipping point.

      • GALT

        Well Bruce, it would seem that we have differing views as to the “extent” of what
        the demand for government services are or might be desired, required or necessary……

        This is not particularly a surprise, since as with economic’s you live in the world of the
        “invisible hand” which is a fantasy……..as the Smith quote above demonstrates……

        Even though you did not respond directly, this would seem to indicate that for you
        government is the problem…….and there are simply to many basic flaws in your
        reasoning to attempt to address the anecdotal examples by which you attempt to
        support that position.

        The world of 1776 was a simplistic one, one of conquest and exploitation, extermination
        and theft………this was the business of business, and it remains as such……unfortunately
        this REALITY is not one of common acceptance……..even though,government has been
        clearly corrupted…….and conspiracies abound…….one has to marvel at the cognitive dissonance that inhibits the ability to make the connection.

        Corrupted by whom, for what purpose and for whose benefit?

        This trail does not lead to mafia dons or drug cartels…..but to the boardrooms of
        multinational corporations…….who supply ( or have ) the “growth” upon which
        the fraud of economics rests………and there does not seem to be a connection
        between growth and the actual benefit produced……if there is any benefit at all….

        Let’s create JOBS……for what purpose……..at whose expense?

        The answer does not lend itself to the simplistic conceptions of the majority….who
        know two things for certain……..this aren’t going well and they don’t look to
        improve any time soon……….while they remain, to a large extent, ignorant of
        the causes……..and the only solution they are being offered by anyone is
        “continued growth”……..which is an illusion and unsustainable.

        There is a list of books below which will make the why of this potentially understandable
        as to both the cause……historically and empirically, as well as the path that must
        be taken to proceed……..and much of it will require that most of what you believe
        to be true…….will need to be discarded.

        It is no easy task and many great men of the past have failed to adapt to information
        which required them to discard their mythologies……..Albert Einstein was devastated
        by the revelation that not only did god play dice with the universe, but at the
        quantum level, existence itself was reduced to probabilities.

        There is no shame in failure…….only in failing to try.

        • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

          Galt, Again, we will disagree on the degree to which government should exist. I think there are several functions of government that are good. You on the other hand seem to feel that all functions of the federal government are bad.

          I do not agree in corporate cronyism where the government runs the boardroom and the boardroom totally depends on the government. This is different than the purpose of the FED which is to control the supply of money and make sure that transactions are processed and funds transfered between financial institutions.

          Again overnight lending by the FED is important as the cash on hand at a financial institution may very greatly from the assets and we want to be sure that the level of cash needed to conduct business and honor a persons transactions is there.

          I do not have any problem with some level of government involvement. I do disagree with taking government expenditures from a historic level of 20% of the GDP to a non-WW II record of 24% GDP in the past 4 years. I do have a problem with running $1.3 trillion deficits each year for the past three years. I do have a problem with tax policies that prevent the private sector from developing jobs.

          It is matter of degree, I want less government not no government. You appear to want no government at the federal level.

      • GALT

        Well Bruce it would appear that we have a far more serious problem in that
        you seem to have no understanding of what my position is……..

        “You on the other hand seem to feel that all functions of the federal government are bad.”

        which is rather strange regarding the information you have available, or the closing
        line of my response to you, which quotes the author of the original piece……

        “The right thing for government to do is simply get the heck out of the way. ”

        and closes with Is NOT the SOLUTION!!!!!!!!

        Also given the choice which is offered regarding the problem which is either government
        is the problem or corrupt government is the problem……….you seem somewhat confused…….and the following explains why.

        I do not agree in corporate cronyism where the government runs the boardroom and the boardroom totally depends on the government.

        Governments DO NOT run boardrooms……..in fact you seemed to have missed
        on both points………..and your cronyism is not “corrupt government”, but corporations
        corrupted by government……and enthralled to government……seriously?

        In the REAL world……..neither government nor their central banks have any control
        over the actions of multinational corporations………..yet you seem oblivious to this, which probably explains why you did not answer the question………in your world government
        is the corruptor ? ( which makes the present situation an amazing one indeed
        where government was forced to “bail out” that which you say they have complete
        control of??????? )

        It would appear that “orwellian double speak” has succeeded beyond all imagining…..
        beginning with this “article” by Stephen Foli labeled as “special to personal liberty”, when its correct description is “selected mushroom of the week” contribution award…….which says nothing and means less……….

        In mushroom land there exists an amazing dichotomy, where extremely complex relationships inspire both extremely simplistic observations to provoke even more
        simplistic comments………yet when asked to perform actual exercises in reduction
        the mushrooms resist all attempts…….to include defining the words they use to
        any degree of precision………let alone to begin the required intellectual effort to
        reconstruct those idea’s upon which they rely……..to achieve the necessary synthesis
        that can begin to address or approach the reality of modernity.

        This requires dismantling the undue reverence to the mythology of the wisdom of
        the “founders”……..who while they understood the tendencies of the species
        regarding “corruption and greed”………….because they were the victims of it,
        they had no concept, nor could they have………as to the changes that would alter
        this world in ways that they could not have possibly imagined……….a situation
        which is similar to the present……..where the majority of the living, NOW are in
        precisely the same place…….having no clue what really exists or that change is
        accellerating beyond their ability to comprehend it………since they do not comprehend
        what has already occurred……….yet they believe that the answer lies in the past…
        which offers nothing but FAILURE. ( and the luxury of not having to THINK at all. )

        “The lesson of history is that we have learned NOTHING from history” and largely
        due to the fact that most are “ignorant” of it…….and are encouraged to continue
        by those whose interests will benefit by such a belief.

        “To conquer, first DIVIDE!!!!” ( and then HANG, separately.)

    • Stephan F.

      Mr. Galt:

      Your response to this piece seems to rely heavily on your apparent unilateral determination that “demand creates jobs”, and you follow it up with an “end of argument” assumption, thusly:

      “So let’s concede that demand “creates” jobs……”
      “We are still on track……….demand creates jobs”
      “But we are still on track………demand creates jobs”
      “So thank you for pointing out that………..Demand creates jobs!!!!!!!!!!!”

      Let me state up front that the “we” you are speaking of does not include this writer. One can conclude that the gist of the article is that no one person, thing, or event creates jobs. Jobs simply come into existence as a result of economic activity, which happens most vibrantly in a laissez faire environment. So naturally I have to disagree with your conclusion, and your ultimatum that “demand creates jobs”

      Lastly, you stated, “Now we have to ask, what is the source of the Keynesian crap…”

      You apparently misinterpreted or misconstrued what was actually stated. The quote was: “contrary to modern-day Keynesian claptrap….”

      Although I agree that Keynesian economics is a pseudo-science, and is therefore “crap”, the quote was directed at the MSM in its attempt to peddle the legitimacy of Mr. Keynes’ philosophy.

      Best Regards

      • GALT

        You would have to go to “economics is a psuedo science” ACTUALLY catch up…..

        To catch up you need to read…..

        Economics Unmasked
        Econned
        Debt The First 5000 Years
        Power, Inc
        Extreme Money
        The Great Divergence

        I wish to thank you for attempting a response, and yes I did repeat the rather simplistic
        declaration of Stephen Foli for effect…….

        So Stephen F. did you have a point………because whatever the author’s point was
        has been reduced to a rather self evident statement…….which is meaningless without
        qualification, which was qualified by me……..and which you have failed to attribute
        properly, comment on or comprehend the qualifications offered……and are responding to me for a purpose which is? ( his conclusion was also totally trashed…..so again, did you
        have a point? )

  • eddie47d

    I don’t think you even answered your own question. Who are the real job creators? “Unlike productive persons who actually create things” Then you go on to bash Liberals. So Bill Gates didn’t “create things”? If Soros and Buffet haven’t hired people to work for them then that would be one giant slap in the face to Mitt Romney who has done even less in that department. Bain was a shell game in taking from one company and making themselves rich. Where in the world did the author come up with finding “jobs for the downtrodden masses” Now that was certainly a gem! No business person hires anyone because they are down on their luck They hire so someone else can do the work and and in turn that owner can make piles of money. Once the job is done that down on their luck person is toast. Now that is the real world not this silly Liberal bashing and another lame attempt to squeeze MSM in.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

      Eddie: The supposition that jobs were not created at Bain is wrong. Over 80% of Bain’s purchases of businesses succeeded. There were over 100,000 net jobs created during Romney’s tenure. Only one company had jobs outsource to china during this tenure and in fact 2500 US jobs were created at this company at the same time. What saves creates jobs is an increase in demand for the companies products and services. This something that Bain did well was to reinvent the company and market its existing/new porducts/services. By comparison, when Obama “saved GM and Chrysler” he insisted that 1000 dealerships be closed in spite of GM’s president saying no money would be saved through these closings (“the dealership closings will not save one *&$% dime”). the 100,000 layoffs were out of fairness to the autoworkers unions for their much smaller sacrifices. Since the bailout both GM and Ford have greatly increased their production in China. This is not wrong since that is where demand is; however, it hypocritical for Obama to brag about US jobs created/saved by the bailout.

    • ChristyK

      I would disagree at least partially with the author’s premise. I agree that it is not entirely correct to say a business creates jobs by hiring a job (in a sense he does, though). A business creates jobs by meeting a need of consumers. If a business makes something, sells something, or services something and does it well, then consumers will choose to pay that business for their product or service. When a business grows, it needs to hire more people to continue meeting the needs of the consumer and therefore hires. The consumer’s needs are met; the business makes money; and employees are hired and paid. Everyone wins. If a business meerly hires to “make” a job, it increases his costs. The business either makes less money, loses money, or passes on the additional costs to the consumer. If the business loses money, it eventially goes out of business, hurting the consumer and the employee. If the business passes on the additional cost, it is likely to lose customers who don’t think that the goods or services are worth that much. If enough consumers leave, the business goes out of business. If the consumer really likes the good or service, he may be willing to pay the additional price, but now has less disposable income to spend elsewhere. Most likely another business will have to fire employees or it will fail costing jobs. The only way to cause a net increase in jobs, is for a business to provide a quality good or service at a reasonable price. In this case all parties win. The only role government should have is making sure that the business doesn’t lie to the consumer or cause physical harm to the consumer. All other regulations hurt the business, the consumer, and the employee.

      • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

        Christy, Businesses do create jobs if they hire and spending by employees creates other jobs in the economy. If you do not start out with consumer demand then all the job creation will be lost and the new employees will be laid off again.

      • AZ-Ike

        ChristyK, In the midst of all the philosophical discussion someone, at last, has given a rational explanation of the creation of jobs.

        Of course, without consumer demand, there is no reason to form a business to meet the demand. However, consumers do not ‘create’ jobs. Consumers can wish forever that someone would provide something, make life easier, etc. But the wish doesn’t get it done–and therefore no jobs are created by consumer demand or the wish of those who want a job, and expect it to be provided.

        As you say, ChristyK, businesses are formed by one or more individuals to meet a demand.
        And, the rest of your analysis is spot-on. Businesses create jobs to meet demand–and in doing so create jobs. It is that simple. Even the neighbor who hires his neighbor’s kid to cut the lawn has created a job. It shouldn’t be discounted. It isn’t the neighbor who is suffering from economic ignorance; it is the author, himself.

        Mr. Soli throws out the ‘accusation’ that employers only ‘create jobs’ because they BENEFIT from hiring people to meet consumer demand. He seems to be saying the ‘benefit’ negates the ‘job creation.’ Of course employers benefit! No one in his right mind would start a business unless s/he expected to profit from it. Nor would s/he hire additional employees unless they added to the total profits.

        The only thing Mr. Soli is correct about is that government laws and regulations stifle job creation because government actions disrupt and interfere with the economy. It is too bad Mr. Soli implies the economy is devoid of people–people who create businesses and people’s businessess that create job–all for profit. Until recently, profit, wealth, and success were goals of Americans. It is shameful that liberal progressive-communists subscribe to the disinformation that has so greatly damaged American culture, creativity and Constitution.

        • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

          AZ-Ike, Yes you are right, without demand there is no job creation and without inovation there are no new products for the public to demand. The government very much over-regulates and makes it difficult for businesses to compete in the marketplace.

  • Bernie Jasken

    You’re right – it is “Marketplace Demand” that creates jobs – however in your report (just like most reports we get in the media) you failed to take the next “vital” step and explain to anyone who does not understand, How it is that the “Marketplace Demand” is this “job Creator”.
    I think most everyone who already understands this simply assumed you were going to take that next step – but alas – just like the media – you can “identify” but you can’t “educate”.
    I doubt anyone reading your peice who didn’t already understand came away saying, “Oh, now I see how that works!” Bernie

    • Vigilant

      “I doubt anyone reading your peice (sic) who didn’t already understand came away saying, “Oh, now I see how that works!”

      1.Your statement is called a “tautology” (using different words to say the same thing, or a series of self-reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because they depend on the assumption that they are already correct). Isn’t it fairly obvious to you that those who understand would not have a “Eureka” moment?

      2.There are MANY who do not understand. And many more are added to the roles of the ignorant with each graduating class from the public so-called “education” system.

      3. As for “How it is that the “Marketplace Demand” is this “job Creator,” anyone who can’t grasp the simplicity of supply and demand should be re-enrolled in elementary school.

      • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

        Vigilant, about 70% of the voters did not take Economics 301 in college and do not really understand the concept of supply and demand. When the public is given more money to spend through tax cuts, they buy more, businesses respond by producing more and need to hire more. The formerly unemployed have more to spend and therefore can also buy more and the cycle continues for several months/years until demand starts to weaken

  • dan

    you want a job…get married. You want another …have children. Equating jobs/work with money
    is where most begin to get off the track. It’s time , creativity and effort that are the commodities that we trade in … and time is what we have in limited supply and we need to consider the origins of that gift.

  • Chester

    For most employers, the ideal situation involves maximum production at minimum cost, which is why so many have off-shored all our precious manufacturing jobs. The big thing they have neglected in their rush for profits is to watch quality control. Is a tinny little car built in India and designed to sell for less than three thousand dollars on the world market going to have the same quality as a heavy Lincoln built mostly here in the states and designed to sell upwards of sixty thousand dollars? Doubtful, but will they both get you from here to there? They should, as that is exactly what they are both designed to do. But, our employer is going to try selling you that cheap car for the Lincoln price, claiming he needs that much to make a profit on it.

    • Pete

      What the employers that outsourced our jobs overlooked was: When all the workers here got laid off when their jobs were outsourced, who is going to buy the outsourced product when they are unemployed and have no money?

      • Vigilant

        What the government overlooked was: when they established the highest corporate income tax rates in the industrialized world, when they threw regulatory roadblocks up that prevent startups and squeeze the profit margins of existing businesses, when they engaged in fruitless money pits like the alternative energy industry that neither create jobs nor realize a return for the taxpayers, who is going to fault these outsourcers?

        We are now something like number 16 down the list of free economies in the industrialized world. If the government got its nose (and greedy hands) out of the economy, it wouldn’t be long before we would be number one on that list.

  • Tony

    Why Isn’t Obama Pushing this GREEN ENERGY ?? Run Your Car across America for FREE
    Today Tesla Motors , http://www.teslamotors.com/ , unveiled its highly anticipated Supercharger network, which is said to make long distance travel in cars totally free thanks to the use of solar energy and electricity. So far the network is made up of six Supercharger stations stretching across California, as well as parts of Nevada and Arizona.
    These stations will allow the Tesla Model S to recharge for free, and each charge is said to last for an extremely long distance. This is so groundbreaking because until now one of the major drawbacks to electric cars was their inability to travel long distances on a single charge.
    The charging centers that have opened so far are just the first of many, the company plans to install Superchargers in high traffic corridors across the United States, enabling fast, purely electric travel from Vancouver to San Diego, Miami to Montreal and Los Angeles to New York, all by next year.
    By 2015, Tesla Motors plans to create more than 100 charging stations across the United States, while also branching out into Europe and Asia.
    The Supercharging stations will be twice as fast as any now in use and will be installed at highway rest stops . http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_21622079/tesla-motors-unveils-superchargers-at-event-near-los
    The rooftop canopy at many of the charging stations will carry a solar array that will place more electricity onto the local power grid, over time, than the cars use. For an undisclosed price there will also be home charging stations that will make local driving more convenient.
    Elon Musk, Tesla Motors co-founder and CEO said in a press release , http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-motors-launches-revolutionary-supercharger-032000226.html , ”Tesla’s Supercharger network is a game changer for electric vehicles, providing long distance travel that has a level of convenience equivalent to gasoline cars for all practical purposes.
    However, by making electric long distance travel at no cost, an impossibility for gasoline cars, Tesla is demonstrating just how fundamentally better electric transport can be. We are giving Model S the ability to drive almost anywhere for free on pure sunlight.”
    It is only fitting for an achievement like this to come from an organization that took on the name of Tesla. Nikola Tesla , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla , was one of the greatest inventors in history and had actually discovered methods of harnessing free energy during his lifetime.
    Since many of Tesla’s inventions were not politically feasible they were never invested in and were never able to truly be realized.
    Today’s political climate is just as treacherous and controlled as it was in Tesla’s day, and there are many people out there who are fighting to suppress this sort of energy, so the development of these charging sites will be a very interesting thing to watch.
    Already there has been talk of financial problems for the company, and it was in the news this month that Morgan Stanley basically controls their stock rating , http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120917/us-tesla-motors-mover/ .
    That in itself is another ironic twist, because Morgan Stanley can trace its roots to J.P Morgan, the investor who pulled his funding on Tesla , http://io9.com/5127125/the-greatest-inventions-nikola-tesla-never-created
    , when he realized the financial and political implications of a world with free energy.
    Morgan Stanley has been kind to Tesla Motors so far but we all know that history has a tendency to repeat itself so that is another thing to look out for.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

      Tony, I have a question, is there an industry standard for chargers? All lightbulbs will generally fit in the same fixtures, shouldn’t all chargers fit these charging stations. You nshould be able to charge your Leaf, Volt or other electric at the same station as a Tesla? If you do not have a standard charger that all cars can use, you are making the infrastructure to support these cars more expensive than needed.

    • ChristyK

      If Tesla does this with absolutely no federal funding, then hooray for Tesla. If my tax money is going to pay for research, cars, and power for a vehicle that someone else will own, that is theft and unconstitutional. I hope it actually works without federal funding or interference.

      • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

        ChristyK, I agree, Tesla should be able operate without federal intervention. If it is not able to do so then it should stand or not stand on its own. The economic model is there a few years out as power density and charging times improve. Until then, if the business model does not allow a profit, then the company should delay going into the marketplace.

  • r.p.

    Finally….. Someone who understands the BS that’s comming out of the mouths of our politicians and MSM pundits. To put it simply… “A thriving economy creats jobs.” How do you get a thriving economy? Abolish the FED and the IRS for starters then go after and “nullify” those unconstitutional regulations.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

      I understand that there is not a person who is a job creator. I agree with abolishing the IRS which is a job killer. The FED serves a pupose on controling money supply and lending money overnight to prevent financial institutions from running out. The latest move by the FED, QE 3, oversteps these bounds and will create up to $2 trillion in fiat money. Worthless currency that will only drive inflation.

      The $2 trillion is the same amount that coroporations are now holding out of fear of an Obama tax increase. Under Romney/Ryan this money will be freed up by the 20% tax decrease. This will allow industries to expand, the trade agreements that we now lack will open up new markets to our goods and services. This does not make Romney/Ryan job creators, it frees up the marketplace to use more money and create the jobs the marketplace can add when spending increases.

      This could be up to 20 million plus jobs if the funds are spent and invested properly. This is job ceation by business not by government intervention.

  • Pingback: Who Are The Real Job Creators? : Personal Liberty Digest™ | Online Study Zone

  • s c

    In effect, government makes it possible for lobbyists to kontrol elected officials. Some might call being a lobbyists a ‘job.’ Then again, politicians never could understand the difference between a real job and a b j.
    People, the government creates situations. There isn’t enough collective intelligence in government to create a real job. This prez and this Kongress prove that daily.
    Friends don’t let friends think about becoming politicians. And, people who really care about Amerika don’t let politicians stay in Washington long enough to make it a career. Put the vermin behind bars – that’s where they belong.

  • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

    Of course, many of these lobbyists have incomes exceeding $1 million per year. The only way the government creates a job is by getting out of the way and letting businesses do business. The current (past 50 years or so) with a government of bureaucrats making too many regulations and hurting business has done nothing to help grow the economy.

  • Chris

    Ooooohhhhhh………Tesla! To blow the mind, read “Man Out of Time”…….a book about Tesla, where you’ll also learn it was NOT Edison who invented the light bulb.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bruce.fouraker Bruce Fouraker

      Chris, Tesla also invented the wireless before Marconi. In fact in a court case in 1947 it was determined that his patent filed in 1895 was a functional radio and he was the inventor.

  • s c

    In most cases, people in small businesses and anyone whose name isn’t Obummer has a chance to create jobs. Governments destroy. Governments steal. Governments lie.
    Does anyone think Wall Street or the suck-ups who got bailed out or got major Uncle Scam ‘loans’ can or will create jobs? Wanna buy some choice real estate on the back side of the sun? At this rate, we’ll be able to define “human” as anything breathes.
    Government has NO business trying to create jobs. Period.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.