Economy
See other Economy Articles
Title: Proving the GOP conservatives are suckers: The Rich are really job destroyers not "job creators". As the rich got richer, they eliminated jobs.
Source:
msnbc.msn.com
URL Source: http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_ne ... 927178-the-koch-brothers-graph
Published: Sep 23, 2011
Author: Will Femia
Post Date: 2011-09-26 11:43:41 by Godwinson
Keywords: None
Views: 83694
Comments: 129
The chart above showing the relationship between the Koch brothers' net worth and the number of people they employ. And so we see that the net wealth of the Koch brothers has grown, but that wealth has not trickled down in the form of job creation at their company. In fact, the Koch brothers have been JOB DELETERS in favor of padding their bank accounts. I bet if I found the data it would show salaries of their remaining employees have also been reduced. The ExxonMobil chart above also shows the lack of correlation between rising income and "job creation". How long will you GOP/conservative/libertarian suckers keep arguing that the rich should be left alone because they are "job creators"? 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 120.
#84. To: Godwinson (#0)
You are stupid as is this article and the carpet muncher Maddow. So because the Koch's made money in the Obama Depression and didn't hire a lot more people (as would any smart company would do when the Kenyan is trying to screw them), this is supposed to prove the rich are job destroyers? How many people did you hire this past year?
The rich Kochs made $8 billion dollars between 2007 and 2008 under Bush and added on NO NEW employees. Between 2008 and 2011 the Kochs made $12 billion dollars MORE in the Obama era over what they made in Bush's last year in office and those richers DELETED/FIRED/SHED 13,000 employees. The rich Kochs, still paying Bush level tax cuts, etc did not hire more workers as they made more money but fired them. Hence you Koch suckers can't claim the rich are JOB CREATORS without being called for your Orwellian BullShit.
So why would they need to hire anybody? How many people have you hired?
How many people of the rich and corporations with their record profits hired? The rich and the mega corporations are job deleters even when they are flush with cash. Why are you Koch suckers still calling the richers "job creators"?
gobsheit: How many people of the rich and corporations with their record profits hired? The rich and the mega corporations... blah blah blah........ Translation: NONE. Announcer: Thanks for playing, gobsheit! Johnny, what do we have for the empty-headed socialist?
In mathematics, zero is greater than negative. Since the richers fired people rather than hired people I am ahead of the curve.
Rule of Disinformation #13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact. Straight out of Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," "Accuse others of what you do." Really, you'll have to do much better, if you want to keep up.
You are the one avoiding the FACT that the ones the GOP/conservatives call "JOB CREATORS" aka "RICHERS" actually are JOB ELIMINATORS and are so even as they make record profits.
WOW... ((((raised eyebrows)))) That's gotta' be the most convoluted sentence I've seen, in quite some time. You seem to think the situation we're in revolves around politicians and businessmen with an "R" as their political identity, versus those with a "D" to represent their political views. And it ain't about R vs. D. It's about corporatist socialism (what we have had since ~JFK), versus socialism (a la the USSR) that YOU want, versus capitalism (what I want). If they're CROOKS, they need to be hanging out the end of a rope. It doesn't matter to me if they call themselves an "R" or a "D", they're STILL CROOKS! You keep falling for the same old "us versus them" game. And so they keep playing you. GROW UP! George W. Bush (Herr Dumbass) was bad. Bush-I was bad. Clinton was bad. oBUMa is REALLY bad! When did you think someone could Jimmy Carter look competent? Let's see... Six elections, and we keep getting the same old shit, steadily plodding towards the police-state...? You see a trend, yet? We're moving toward a level of corporatist fascism that Mussolini would have turned green with envy, over! With a lot of leftist bloggers calling oBUMa Bush-III, do you STILL believe there's a difference between the parties? DO YOU?
If they're CROOKS, they need to be hanging out the end of a rope. It doesn't matter to me if they call themselves an "R" or a "D", they're STILL CROOKS! You keep falling for the same old "us versus them" game. And so they keep playing you. Excellent. Easy equation that all party partisans refuse to deal with. That said, anti-America Destro is hopelessly and eternally lost in space. Write him/her/it off as incapable of logic.
Excellent. Easy equation that all party partisans refuse to deal with. Listen, you 2 loons, you make up your own definitions about economic system by pulling them out of your asses. Since I am not a loon, I have no idea why you would be against the economic climate under the JFK era and want to return to an era of robber barons pre Teddy Roosevelt or FDR's era. It was before my time, but JFK's America was not so bad a place to be. Neither was Eisenhower's America with the 90% tax brackets. I don't know what kind of logic you two loons are using and maybe you two loons are the ones lost in space and not your nemesis "Destro". Meanwhile, the rich you defend got richer and did not trickle down any wealth at all. The rich are turning out to be parasite who create no wealth for society and serve no purpose since they are not investing in any growth. The wealthy in America - the ones the GOP defend as "job creators" are anything but. They are in fact more like feudal era overlords. In fact, with only 2% of Americans owning 98% of the wealth - that is America reverting to a serf like feudal wealth divisions of class not seen in America since the pre Civil War slave owning aristocracy.
Do you actually believe 0bama's torching the US economy, favoring foreign interest over domestic, and shaking down and sabotaging businesses is how JFK conducted things? JFK was a C-A-P-I-T-A-L-I-S-T. What frickin' planet are you on? Can you or ANY of your ilk point to ANY business-friendly legislation or policies of 0bama that have benefited US business or encouraged it to grow? Take all the time you need. JFK's America was not so bad a place to be. Neither was Eisenhower's America with the 90% tax brackets. This is true....BUT... This was a half century ago...before the Socialist-Plantation Economy, Parasites-R-US, the Third World Invasion, the NWO-globalists strangling the US economy, and a UN manipulating the world's trade and money supplies and taxing the West.
Uranus?
IF I had to guess....;-)
There are no replies to Comment # 120. End Trace Mode for Comment # 120.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#85. To: no gnu taxes (#84)
(Edited)
this is supposed to prove the rich are job destroyers?
#93. To: Godwinson (#85)
#96. To: no gnu taxes (#93)
#104. To: Godwinson, no gnu taxes (#96)
no gnu taxes: How many people have you hired?
Johnny: A BOOT to the head! And one more for Jennie and the wimp!
#107. To: Capitalist Eric, no gnu taxes, war (#104)
(Edited)
Translation: NONE.
#110. To: Godwinson (#107)
In mathematics, zero is greater than negative. Since the richers fired people rather than hired people I am ahead of the curve.
Rule of Disinformation #15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. Loonymom: Again, you define and divide human beings so broadly as to be useless.
#111. To: Capitalist Eric (#110)
(Edited)
#112. To: Godwinson (#111)
You are the one avoiding the FACT that the ones the GOP/conservatives call "JOB CREATORS" aka "RICHERS" actually are JOB ELIMINATORS and are so even as they make record profits.
#113. To: Capitalist Eric, Godwinson (#112)
And it ain't about R vs. D. It's about corporatist socialism (what we have had since ~JFK), versus socialism (a la the USSR) that YOU want, versus capitalism (what I want).
#114. To: Capitalist Eric, Liberator, lucysmom (#113)
(Edited)
And it ain't about R vs. D. It's about corporatist socialism (what we have had since ~JFK), versus socialism (a la the USSR) that YOU want, versus capitalism (what I want).
#117. To: Godwinson (#114)
I have no idea why you would be against the economic climate under the JFK era...
#118. To: Liberator (#117)
What frickin' planet are you on?
#120. To: Capitalist Eric (#118)
Uranus?
Replies to Comment # 120.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]