[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets

Egypt Amasses Forces on Israel’s Southern Border | World War 3 About to Start?

"Trump wants to dismantle the Education Department. Here’s how it would work"

test

"Federal Workers Concerned That Returning To Office Will Interfere With Them Not Working"

"Yes, the Democrats Have a Governing Problem – They Blame America First, Then Govern Accordingly"

"Trump and His New Frenemies, Abroad and at Home"

"The Left’s Sin Is of Omission and Lost Opportunity"

"How Trump’s team will break down the woke bureaucracy"

Pete Hegseth will be confirmed in a few minutes


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Business
See other Business Articles

Title: Finally, A Rich American Destroys The Fiction That Rich People Create The Jobs
Source: Daily Ticker
URL Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail ... h-people-create-152949393.html
Published: Dec 15, 2011
Author: Henry Blodget
Post Date: 2011-12-17 22:19:37 by lucysmom
Keywords: None
Views: 34057
Comments: 64

In the war of rhetoric that has developed in Washington as both sides blame each other for our economic mess, one argument has been repeated so often that many people now regard it as fact:

Rich people create the jobs.

Specifically, entrepreneurs and investors, when incented by low taxes, build companies and create millions of jobs.

And these entrepreneurs and investors, therefore, the argument goes, can solve our nation's huge unemployment problem — if only we cut taxes and regulations so they can be incented to build more companies and create more jobs.

In other words, by even considering raising taxes on "the 1%," we are considering destroying the very mechanism that makes our economy the strongest and biggest in the world: The incentive for entrepreneurs and investors to build companies in the hope of getting rich and, in the process, creating millions of jobs.

Now, there have long been many problems with this argument starting with

1. Taxes on rich people (capital gains and income) are, relative to history, low, so raising them would only begin to bring them back in line with prior prosperous periods, and

2. Dozens of rich entrepreneurs have already gone on record confirming that a modest hike in capital gains and income taxes would not have the slightest impact on their desire to create companies and jobs, given that tax rates are historically low.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 18.

#2. To: Not Badeye, A K A Stone, Fred Mertz, Godwinson, go65, war, no gnu taxes, Skip Intro, ferret mike, jwpegler, mininggold, brian s, mcgowanjm (#0)

The most important reason the theory that "rich people create the jobs" is absurd, argues Nick Hanauer, the founder of online advertising company aQuantive, which Microsoft bought for $6.4 billion, is that rich people do not create jobs, even if they found and build companies that eventually employ thousands of people.What creates the jobs, Hanauer astutely observes, is a healthy economic ecosystem surrounding the company, which starts with the company's customers.

ping

lucysmom  posted on  2011-12-18   0:09:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: lucysmom (#2)

is a healthy economic ecosystem surrounding the company, which starts with the company's customers.

ping

So tell Hobama to quit taking money out of the economy for his schemes.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-12-18   0:14:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: A K A Stone (#3)

So tell Hobama to quit taking money out of the economy for his schemes.

If you're talking about taxes, then Obama ain't taking or spending all by himself - that's number one.

2. The government puts back into the economy everything it takes out - unless, of course, the wealthy get more tax cuts and hoard their windfall (kind of like cash bloated corporations buying back their own stock).

lucysmom  posted on  2011-12-18   0:46:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: lucysmom, A K A Stone (#8)

The government puts back into the economy everything it takes out...

Demonstrably false. But rather than go into graphs and explanations, I'll simply quote from the HIDDEN COSTS OF GOVERNMENT SPENDING, by Jim Saxton (R-NJ), Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, United States Congress, December 2001:

"Debate about the proper size and functions of government is, of course, one of the main topics of political debate. What an economic perspective can add to the debate is an estimate of just what we gain or give up when the government shifts a dollar of spending from the private sector to itself. This involves thinking about what is known as the “deadweight loss” or “excess burden” of taxation.

III. THE DEADWEIGHT LOSS OF TAXES

An explanation of the deadweight loss. The deadweight loss of a tax is a measure of the value that consumers and producers of a good lose from the imposition of the tax. Because of deadweight losses, the taxpayers’ losses exceed the government’s gain. Comparing a good without tax to the same good when the government imposes a tax, the tax operates as a wedge between the price consumers pay and the price producers receive. The government collects the wedge. Besides generating revenue, though, the wedge changes how consumers and producers behave.

Let us use a hypothetical example to illustrate. Suppose the good being taxed is gasoline, and before the tax is imposed, gasoline sells for $1.00 a gallon at the pump. Consumers and producers each receive a kind of benefit from the price being where it is. Consumers receive what economists call consumer surplus because the price of gasoline is lower than what some consumers would be willing to pay. A consumer who would be willing to pay as much as $1.20 a gallon, for instance, enjoys 20 cents a gallon in consumer surplus from the price being $1.20 a gallon. Similarly, a producer that is efficient enough to be able to produce gasoline at 80 cents a gallon enjoys 20 cents a gallon in what economists call producer surplus from the price being $1.00 a gallon. (Producer surplus is different from profit.

Profit accrues to the owners of a business, while producer surplus includes the net gains of everyone who helped produce the good, including employees.) Now suppose there is a tax of 40 cents a gallon (roughly what combined state and federal taxes for gasoline are, on average). With the tax, the price of a gallon of gasoline rises to, say, $1.20. Why doesn’t it rise to $1.40? Typically, in the short run producers cannot simply pass along the full amount of a tax to consumers because the higher price leads consumers to buy less of the good. High-cost producers have to cut back production or even go out of business. Lower-cost producers stay in business. Where consumers are highly sensitive to changes in the price of a good (or, as economists say, when their demand is highly elastic), the price consumers pay may rise only a little, or in the extreme case, not at all. Accordingly, people sometimes claim that in such cases producers rather than consumers bear the burden of the tax. In the final analysis, though, somebody somewhere bears the burden in his role as a consumer. If gasoline refiners have to lay off workers because a tax reduces demand for gasoline, those workers have less ability to consume.

With the tax, gasoline now costs $1.20 gallon, but gasoline stations only receive 80 cents a gallon in revenue for themselves. The 40-cent wedge that the gasoline tax imposes means that some buying and selling that went on before the tax now ceases.

Consider what would happen if the tax did not exist. There are some consumers who would be willing to pay 90 cents, $1.00, $1.10, or even $1.19 for an extra gallon of gasoline, but do not buy the extra gallon because at $1.20 a gallon they consider it too expensive. On the other hand, there are some gasoline stations that would be willing to sell gasoline at $1.10, $1.00, 90 cents, or even 81 cents a gallon without the tax, but do not, because at 80 cents a gallon in revenue the price is too low for them.

Hence the demand for gasoline falls. Lower demand for gasoline means lower demand for workers who explore for oil, pump it out of the ground, refine it into gasoline, transport the gasoline, and sell it to motorists. The tax reduces economic activity. The other side of the imposition of the tax is that consumer surplus and producer surplus fall. Consumer surplus falls 20 cents a gallon, and for those consumers who formerly enjoyed 1 to 20 cents a gallon in consumer surplus, the surplus disappears.

Producer surplus also falls 20 cents a gallon, and for those producers that formerly enjoyed 1 to 20 cents a gallon in producer surplus, the surplus disappears. (Note that in this example producers and consumers alike lost 20 cents a gallon in surplus, but taxes need not always affect producer and consumer surplus equally.)

...Types of deadweight loss. What specifically are the types of deadweight loss involved in taxes? Substitution into less desirable options. If fishing poles are subject to a special tax (as they are under current federal law9), people who do not want to pay the tax can avoid it by making their own poles out of sticks. However, most fishermen prefer store-bought poles, so they lose some degree of satisfaction by using a home-made pole instead.

Reduction of overall economic activity.

By driving a wedge between the price consumers pay and the price producers receive, taxes discourage some transactions that would otherwise occur. Rather than accept a less desirable substitute, some people may buy or do nothing at all. For example, a few people may be so attached to fishing with a store-bought pole that they will accept no substitute if a tax makes the price higher than they wish to pay. As a result, fishing pole makers sell fewer poles than before, so they hire fewer employees than they would otherwise have."

Thanks for playing!!! 8^)

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2011-12-18   18:48:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 18.

#21. To: Capitalist Eric (#18)

Thanks for playing!!! 8^)

"Being first is more important to me. I have so much money. Whatever money is, it's just a method of keeping score now. I mean, I certainly don't need more money." – Larry Ellison

Funny - no mention of taxes in the above. Maybe you're playing the wrong game.

lucysmom  posted on  2011-12-18 22:10:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 18.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com