Leave a comment

Comments 4

albionwood August 30 2011, 03:31:46 UTC
Now that is a brilliant idea: tying tax changes directly to the median wage change. Of course it will immediately get your candidate labeled a Socialist, or worse...

Reply

peristaltor August 30 2011, 19:29:05 UTC
There's a worse label to bear?!?

Reply


richie73 August 30 2011, 16:57:37 UTC
I would like to challenge the idea that the rich create jobs. That's like saying gravity causes plane crashes.

Demand creates jobs, and it's the only thing that ever has. And that's what the supply siders simply don't (want to) understand. If there is a demand that requires more jobs to satisfy, then those rich people will create the jobs, whether they get tax breaks or not. And if there is no demand, then no amount of tax breaks will create those jobs and secure them in the long term. Companies will just find ways to take the tax breaks without a net increase in employment.

Reply

peristaltor August 30 2011, 19:28:33 UTC
Ah, but if you challenge the idea that the rich create job - a sacrosanct idea amongst the conservative set - how can you turn that idea on its ear and suggest that the rich should be punished for not creating those jobs? That's what I set out to do. Instead of trying to convince everyone that I'm right, I'm merely pointing out the fallacy of their initial precept.

As Robert Heinlein wrote, "Never appeal to a man's better nature; he may not have one. Appealing to his self-interest gives you more leverage."

When people lambast me for not considering the market demand for labor, I simply ask why the jobs that got moved overseas by US employers building factories overseas got moved overseas by US employers in the first place. If they had stayed local, there wouldn't be a problem, now would there?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up