Daily Kos

Any revenue increases only get underway in 2013.

If jobs have not been created, by our Galtian overlords, by that time it's game over anyway.

The rich aren't getting hit with the bill till two years down the line. They have plenty of time to put their stacks of dosh to good use (just as Boehner believes they want to) between now and then.

But, that is, of course, all bullshit. The rich had their chance to prime the pump and turned a blind eye to the needs of the many. To hell with 'em, take their hard earned or ill gotten gains right now - not after 2013.

Without demand - which could be unlocked by immediately redirecting money from where it is, in the rich's hands, to where it is needed - in productive use, there will be no reversal of our collective misfortune.

The freshman GOP House members, and the others who have joined the Tea Party Caucus have two goals, to reduce federal government spending and reduce taxes. Many of us think their goal is to reduce the annual deficit and the total US debt, but it's not. They want a dramatic contraction of federal government spending and by not increasing the debt limit they feel it will force the Obama administration to cut the budget by 40%. So there are probably 100 House members who will vote NO on a new debt deal, regardless of the terms. There are probably another 100 that will vote NO if there are any taxes, or revenue enhancements at all.  The Speaker has no control over the GOP House caucus and I don't think a deal will get done by August 2nd.  

...if business owners are the job creators, if they are the only ones who can be a source of jobs for Americans, they must also have been the job destroyers since 2007.  They still haven't made up for the 750,000 jobs per month that were being destroyed when this Administration came into office.  No rational person can claim under any criterion that it's "job creators" and not merely selfish, unpatriotic, richer-than-Midas SOBs who are seeking tax breaks from their Congressional cronies.

"I could start a business next week, hire a bunch of people and make a lot of money. But I just can't do it with Obama threatening tax increases." This is highly amusing since I'm a single dad living in poverty and driving an '85 Chevy van.

Then I say, "Why does it only sound stupid when I say it. I think it's stupid when anyone says it." Especially Boehner.  

don't create jobs, they create deficits. All one has to do is look at the last 10 years since the Bush/ Republican tax cuts were enacted and ask the question: where are all the jobs? If tax cuts create jobs then this country should be flush with them.

I have been seeing some whining about small business bearing the burden of high taxes.  The argument was that they have to pay fees and local taxes that amount to up to 60%.  Then the case was made that for each new hire the cost of unemployment insurance, health insurance and FICA was too onerous.  At first I was feeling bad for them.  Maybe the real small business man is hurting and no one is paying attention.  

But then I remembered my employer.  He could be termed a medium sized business, 95 employees and $100 million in revenue a year.  I do the financial statements every single month.  I realized that each and every one of these items listed above is considered an EXPENSE and comes off the bottom line.  It is not taxed.  The only amount that is taxed is what they show after every single line item of expense is deducted.  

Well you could point to this and say "Oh, but they are a medium business, we are talking small business".  Ummm, no.  It applies to small business too.

Then it gets distributed to the banks and so forth.

We have a distribution problem, not a redistribution problem.  The money is simply not going into the right hands to begin with.

I'm thinking, since US money is not backed by actual assets such as gold or silver, since it's just printed paper, the US Gov't should distribute money by paying for a public option health insurance.

If too much money is being created too soon, then it can give less to The Fed but maintain payment for the public option.

If this doesn't create x amount of jobs, then rates not only return to where they were, but they go UP.

Well said!

that nonsense about "job creators" my blood pressure rises twenty points.  And I'm not gonna lurk it anymore either.

We could give a business a million dollars in cash in addition to cutting its taxes, and it still wouldn't create jobs.  Only demand will create jobs.

Wealth trickles up.  A builder won't build new houses if nobody will buy them, a car manufacturer won't produce new cars if they don't sell, and a widget maker won't make widgets if they stay in the warehouse.  But if there is a huge demand for houses, cars, or widgets, those businesses will hire people to make them.  And I can assure you that their tax rate won't stop them.

Posting this on DKOS doesn't get the message very far. You need the President to say it at a new conference. But Mr. No Stones would never do that. And saying it on DKOS is like blowing in the wind.

He did so by making tax cuts a large portion of the stimulus bill.

stimulated making jobs, the unemployment should be at 1%.  It doesn't.  It won't.  It never has.

That corporations are not job creators in our nation has been evident to the meanest intelligence since Clinton sold us down the river.

So, with that lie so clear, especially when we continue to lose jobs every month, one can only conclude that people using that term are malignant liars who despise us.

I can't believe they even say those words! Hardly any jobs have been created since the crash. What few there have been are not from any particular "job creator", such as the Koch Bros. etc.

Interestingly, The Bush-republican tax cuts for the wealthy have been touted by the GOP as a stimulus for jobs, but no one can point to a single shred of evidence that jobs have been created by these tax cuts. Umm...I mean after ten years! Ten years of time and trillions of dollars in lost revenue, and NO SIGN of stimulus.

Basically, this GOP stimulus package has been biggest flop as far as actually doing what it was supposed to according to its creators. However, they lied.

The tax cuts for the wealthy were never supposed to create jobs!  They know it, and they lie every day. The tax cuts have done exactly what any normal person would expect. They make the rich richer.

Any sane person can see the lie here! I need to take a moment to bang head on wall...

Boehner said "the American people will not allow us to raise taxes on the job creators." But in every poll I've seen, a large majority is in favor of increasing taxes on the wealthy. This is the statement that Obama or somebody really needs to seize on and refute. The American people will allow them to raise taxes on the wealthy, especially given a choice between that and cutting Social Security and Medicare. I guess Boehner was talking only about the small segment of the population that he interacts with and assumes they are represent the views of the other 95% of us.

taxes do matter where business locates.  

This really won't have a huge impact on small business because they lack capital to set-up outside of the US - plus they have vested interest in the US - they live here.

Now big business does have capital to make such choices - the US is a great country to do business in for big business - we have an educated populace, infrastructure, security and stability....but we also have a pretty high corporate tax rate.  Now of course the same big business can lobby Congress to get a special deal.....

Now I agree the corporate tax rate should be higher becasue of what we offer - unfortunately, public companies are driven by shorrt term profit and will usually take the lowest cost deal to maximize profit.

Now a good sober look would be to compare tue costs of doing business in the US with every other reasonably stable country in the world and set our corporate rate so we are competitive.

diary is spot on. My biggest problem right now is that I am losing customers who can no longer afford to splurge on what I sell (I own a nature store). It's hard to justify spending money on birdseed or a new bird feeder when your are struggling to pay medical bills, or put food on your own table. What earthly good is a tax cut going to do for me? A tax cut on profits I am no longer seeing because people are no longer buying my products is worthless to me. Have the government pour some money into the economy in a meaningful way is the only way I see for us to move ahead right now-it sure hasn't happened through anything the private sector has done.

Bumper sticker material, and a good sound bite response every time a Pub objects to raising taxes on the wealthy.

in fact.

Yes, basically, demand is the ultimate source of job creation.
People buy products and services and producers do what they need to satisfy the demand.

The Republican argument isn't exactly backwards -- businesses do need to make a profit on the work their employees do, but... real job creation requires  that the great bulk of people are able to make purchases.

There's a bit of chicken and egg -- you need an income to make purchases  -- but as countless failed products and establishments prove, supply rises to meet demand, not the other way around.

I believe, however, that a lot of businesses do create jobs.  They would be the businesses like my across the street neighbor who employs 3 people in his business that is run mostly from his house.  he pays them living wages and cares very much about the quality of what he does.

I believe that he creates at least 1 job because there is a certain amount of overhead work that comes with running a business,and, in his case, some extra work he does that his competitors won't do.  It might even be more than 1 job because the work his business does would likely be split among multiple competitors, and divied up in a way that might not require hiring by any of them.

But my neighbor is not one of the guys Boehner is talking about.  He's a long way from that $250k bracket, and, judging by the way he treats his people and the charitable work he does (I'm not sure, for example, that he's ever actually charged a church for his services), not in any great hurry to get there.

I just calculated a friends tax (one who doesn't think $300,000 for a couple is rich) and the difference on the 50,000 above the $250,000 cutoff, between 33 and 36% is around $1500.

They cannot tell me with a straight face that they will now create a job. She has a business, not affected by her personal tax rate. Hubby drives cars in races.

They will NOT create a job.

are next to impossible, to dispel ...

Want to Save $2.6 Trillion in National Debt without Cutting Anything?  A Fable.  -- by jamess -- Jul 09, 2011

"Deregulate the economy, and we'll create jobs!'

Then, "Replace welfare with workfare, and we'll create jobs!"

Then, "Sign NAFTA, and we'll create jobs!"

Then, "Give the rich a huge tax kickback, and we'll create jobs!"

And now, "Privatize Social Security, and we'll create jobs!"

The jobs never came. On the contrary, massive unemployment and the liquidation of the middle class have become permanent facts of life.

Yet a majority of Americans appear ready to swallow the lie once again.

Everyone knows that a stake through the heart won't kill zombies.  The preferred method is a shotgun blast to the face.  

Also acceptable would be duct-taping two chainsaws to a kayak paddle, and using said paddle to decapitate at will.

of the numerous items of folklore continuously repeated by the right and often eccoded by MSM and a lot of folks who should know better,  My other favorite is that economic growth is dependent on low taxes.   Why don't we point out the last time for good economic growth was when taxes were higher in late '90s.

Why this isn't bold-type evident to every single American is beyond the comprehension of any intelligent human being.

Of which there are obviously not enough in this country. And I guess that was part of the plan all along.

rich people, especially those who contribute money to Republicans.

Republicans want to cut government workers to create a smaller government which is so short sighted. Public sector workers have paychecks that support our economy by creating demand. Let's start talking about "job-killing" smaller government. Those public sector jobs support a lot of small businesses. When I started a small business in 1977, it was not profitable and unsustainable for the first few years. We only survived because my wife was a teacher and her public sector job supported our family. Now, that business has 16 employees and I like to say that "a teacher created all those jobs". Also, I never hired anyone due to a tax incentive, I only hired when the demand for my product exceeded the ability of my staff to produce. Then, I hired staff to meet the demand. No demand, no hiring. Any tax savings I got went right into my IRA. I wish I could Rec this diary more than once.
 

Perhaps a case study approach might be revealing.  It strikes me that these folks by and large might just be evading taxes that are their responsibility.  Perhaps they are just "tax evaders?"

That's what we lack: good marketing. We call them the rich; they call them job creators. Ayn Rand would be proud of them.

Patriots create jobs at home, but that would sacrifice profits.

but since it serves their purposes. they continue to regurgitate it.

Not speaking about anyone in this thread, but it's a common error for Dems/libs to have the mindset, "If we could only make them understand, they'd stop doing" whatever heinous and calamitous thing they're doing. They know exactly what they're doing. They know Paul Ryan's wine-drinking buddies don't create shit, except for more economic catastrophe. They're perfectly fine with that as long as they and their pals get to keep living the fine lives they're living at our expense.

Indeed it is a matter of reeducation, but not the Ryans and Cantors and Limbaughs and so forth. They're just enemies to be defeated. We need to educate the low-information voter who hears nothing else but "ewww, job creators, we must keep our lips firmly planted on their butts at all times or else the deluge!" But we need to just (verbally and politically) beat these GOP "leaders" until they are completely helpless.

Unlike a lie, a myth isn't supposed to be mistaken for fact.  The Republican Party and the conservative movement would have no credibility if they were trying to argue that the sky is orange, but the thing is that they're not doing that, at least not from the perspective of conservative voters.  Republicans trade in values, in emotional resonance, in "ought" as opposed to "is", and that is where a myth's power comes from.

Talk about "job creators" validates conservative beliefs about heroes and villains and the power of the individual.  It assumes a world where institutions are either irrelevant or harmful, and where it falls to people to make good things happen.  It validates their beliefs about the fragility of the conservative dream and the sense of conservative victimhood, both constantly under attack.  It assumes we live in a "liberal" society that doesn't respect or even recognize those who do the most for it, while privileging those who do the least.  

they hate hiring people.
What they really want is customers and the Rethugs are killing them off.

The simplistic argument of this diary is similar to the simple arguments made by the right that the wealthy and busines owners create jobs.

Of course it is not so simple either way.  Businesses do create jobs...and profits, they are not mutually exclusive, despite what the diary maintains.  But jobs ar not magically created by giving money to the so-called "job creators" either.  Jobs are created when a healthy demand meets a capitalized supply...BOTH SIDES NEED MONEY.

In my opinion the rich and the businesses get far too many tax breaks, it is a matter of fairness and economics, because the burden falls disproportionally on the poor, middle class and more importantly the consumers.

But please lets not pretend that business don't create jobs, they do.

Supply side economics is and always has been a farce.  Demand side economics is what drives job creation.  When there are consumers who are purchasing "stuff" and the retailer or manufacturer cannot meet demand with their current staff, they hire.  Otherwise, they don't.

If the GOP wants a mantra of reduce taxes, I suggest that the first 60K of income for singles and 120K of income for dual income marrieds be declared tax free for the next two years.  This would spur far more consumption than giving another break to the extremely rich.  And it would be in the types of goods and services which would drive the economy into a hiring mode.  But as we all know, these aren't the constituents that the GOP cares about, and probably Obama doesn't either.

No matter how many concessions the government makes on labor and environment laws, and tax breaks, and give away of government owned natural resources, the question is whether American (multinational) industries would really yet be willing to hire Americans, that's a whole other issue.

equals jobs is not something new with Boehner.

It's a central tenet of the Reagan Revolution, and probably goes back even further.

This is essential rightwing thinking.

It's silly to attempt to isolate this epoch shaping ideology to Boehner, or today's Republicans, considering that this is also the ruling ideology and policy guide of 'centrist' third-way Big-Boy Pants(tm) Democrats, like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

It's equally silly, and counterproductive, to imply that this very real, very powerful political stance is the result of lack of information, or even stupidity on the part of those who support it.

The diarist puts out some useful, compelling information.  But it's really a half-serving of reality, with the political half occluded.  To reduce what is in fact the ruling consensus of 30 years and more to a Boehner faux pas is reductive to the point of being apolitical.

Kossacks, please keep the consensus nature of our political in mind as Barack Obama slowly twists the Reagan Revolution knife in your back for the next 5 years or so.

Hopefully, avoiding history and political reality in order to blame the Boehners and the Bachmanns for Democratic perfidy will eventually, at some point, grow tiresome around here.

Please don't feed the security state.

...Here's the truth:

Many of the lost jobs are gone forever...

...including construction jobs, finance jobs and manufacturing jobs. Recent studies suggest that a quarter of U.S. jobs are fully out-sourceable over time to other countries...

Why Employers Won't Hire

The problem with bringing down the stubbornly high unemployment rate is that employers are learning to do more with less....

...because of productivity gain they don't need to hire as many people...The push to do more with less help isn't limited to stores. It can be seen in offices and factories across numerous industries...

And that isn't going away anytime soon..."It's not just getting people to do more," he said. "I think companies have stopped doing things...we don't have the people to do them.' That's not going to change..."

And with proposed "Austerity" programs, which seek to cut  both civilian government and military jobs, there will be even more competition for the few jobs available in the private sector.  

Meanwhile, the rich folks in the Congress and the Administration either don't comprehend this or just don't care--because:  There's no labor market recession for the Affluent.

IMHO--those are a few of the truths that we need to let our elected "representatives" know that we know.  The problem isn't so much that they don't know these things, it's that they think we don't know and that we don't fully understand the games they are playing in order to keep the rich enriched at our expense.

... increase employment..  but for a perverse reason..  Businesses so hated the idea of giving more to the government.. so they chose to invest back into their businesses... more sales.. more demand.. more jobs...

Seeing how businesses are so totally opposed to tax increases now.. this whole dynamic will work perfectly once again..  so raise those rates.

Businesses aren't about creating jobs anymore, just profit.
Labor costs decrease profit.

Short of flipping burgers and vacuuming floors, there isn't much that can't be easily automated or offshored.

That Norman Rockwell crap about putting people back to work is a pipe dream.

Good Jobs and high employment are a memory from the 20th century. It's only going to get worse.

I don't think they are ever going to come back.

that a stable well run government is good for business.  Busineses need to pay their fair share of taxes to run the government.

When governments are run poorly, and countries experience instability, it creates a problem for business investments.

This is the simple truth.

Is there money to be made in an unstable government?  Yes, but it goes to the unscrupulous.

Take a look at out banking/mortgage problem.   This is a good example or government not doing its' job.  Bankers have always needed to be regulated.   They are wolves.

I wonder who is making book on whether the US defaults on its' debt obligations?  

I wish our pundits and politicians, especially Obama would call them on this one.
We've had supply side economics and it's killed demand.

Just answer "The real job creators are the workers who can afford to buy things.  Otherwise why hire people to make things when there's no demand?".

Thanks so much for the diary.  Maybe Alan Grayson can say something.  I keep yelling at my tv every time I hear the term "job creators".  As if...  Let's give ALL the money to the RICH.  That'll help.  

To be clear.  This economy crashed because the middle class had been bled dry.  Sure it manifested it's self in many ways and we can get lost in the details, but in short, when you distill it down.  Bled dry.

Now I think of Europe and the old castles and the peasants who worked so hard for their czars, kings, lords etc.  Look around this country.  We have our own kings.
They have their castles.  We gave them all that wealth one GAP sweater and wall mart special at a time.

on this theme -- the misinformation inherent in the Republicans' (Fred Luntz must be somewhere close) framing of their response to the tax the rich cry, but not NEARLY so eloquently and exhautively as you have.  I mostly just fear the way Repubs' framing always seems to trickle down to the ignorant and becomes more reason for the poor to vote against their own interests.

This is a wonderful diary.

1)  The best lies are always based on a kernel of truth.  Businesses do create jobs ... but not usually in the way the GOP says.  Their world view is entirely occupied by Wall Street - by Big Buniness, and that's what they mean when they say "Business."

2)  Big Business does not create the majority of jobs, but it does get the lion's share of tax breaks.  BofA and Lockheeed/Martin and Chevron are where the money goes, but it is no longer who creates the jobs, at least not here.

3)  Most jobs now are created by small businesses.  But the definition of Small Business is one that Big Business, through their GOP mouthpieces, have been manipulating for the pasty umpteen years.  My friend's book store is a small business.  They employ about a half dozen people, and do probably under a million a year in sales.  They get extremely little help from the tax breaks the GOP wants.
A spin-off division of GE that was created solely to act as a tax dump that employs maybe one fictitious person and has no sales is not one ... but Wall Street considers it as one, and a very useful one.

So you can't say "business does not create jobs'... unless you want to be more clear.  It does, but not in the way they say.

It will become fact.

Sadly, this strategy has worked for them in the past. The majority of the American population is too stupid to think otherwise.

Remember the media talking about death panels in response to the proposition of Single Payer Health Care?

I had actually planned on writing a diary talking about how rich people don't create jobs, the middle class and the poor, through their economic activity do.  Nice job.

As noted above, customers/consumers create demand and that drives business to invest in capital, labor and inventory. Our energies would be better directed as studying those factors which promote consumer confidence.  

Obviously, the amount of doubt and indecision in
Washington, along with the basic level of ignorance in the media, creates a level of uncertainty that has been driven to an extreme to suit the purpose of idealogues.

We have become a fear-driven culture and economy.  The terrorists have won.

they are probably using the SBA's definition, not what we laypeople think of as "small," certainly not Mom'n'Pop operations. I think it's a confusing term; maybe Boehner wants it that way. The small firms I know are usually one or two owners with a few to several employees, some part-time. Not exactly job creators on the scale needed or what the R's deceptively portray.
FWIW, here're SBA definitions:
* Manufacturing: number of employees may range from 500 to 1500, depending on the type of product manufactured;
* Wholesaling: number of employees may range from 100 to 500 depending on the particular product being provided;
* Services: Annual receipts may not exceed $2.5 to $21.5 million, depending on the particular service being provided;
* Retailing: Annual receipts may not exceed $5.0 to $21.0 million, depending on the particular product being provided;
* General and Heavy Construction: General construction annual receipts may not exceed $13.5 to $17 million, depending on the type of construction;
* Special Trade Construction: Annual receipts may not exceed $7 million; and
* Agriculture: Annual receipts may not exceed $0.5 to $9.0 million, depending on the agricultural product.

"  But businesses do not create jobs.  Demand for what a business sells – that’s what creates jobs, or at least, it can.  Only if there is unmet demand in the market for what a business sells will the business owner(s) contemplate hiring someone to help fill the demand."

So, the demand for hula hoops grows, and sure enough, someone invents the hula hoop. Umm, no, wait—that's backwards. Never mind.

Henry Ford pretty much invents the assembly line, lowers the price of horseless carriages enormously and hires hundreds of people to meet a demand that only now grows, thanks to the invention of a new method of production. But why would we say that Ford created jobs? No sir, the People created those jobs. Why, it's Econ 101.

Anyone who dislike anecdotal examples should now close their eyes:
I was part of a business back in the 60s when the marginal tax rate was extremely high, and we were already in that high bracket. Someone brought us a new business opportunity to mine and sell a material not then available in the U.S. We declined on the simple grounds that it would have required a good deal of work, for which we, personally, would have kept 10-15¢ on the dollar of additional income. Too much work for too low an incentive. This might have created 4-5 jobs in the U.S. Eventually, a guy in the UK started the plant up—so those jobs did get created, just not in the U.S. And that's tax policy for you.

Is a very simple, logical form of questioning to GOPers;

Question:  The tax rates are low now and you insist we keep them this way so that those ever fickle creatures, the "Job creators", will start hiring the unemployed.   Agreed?

Answer:  Agreed.

Q:  Then how come they're not creating jobs now?

A:  Well there's uncertainty and regulation and slow growth and fear of gov't takeover and an overall shitty economy and...

Q:  So, you're saying that the tax rate is not the determining factor of whether or not these mythical "Job creators" start hiring?

A:  Uh, yeah, I guess so?

Q:  What is the determining factor?

Watch them squirm.

They're resistant to Piercing damage. You should bludgeon them. Many an archer has fallen due to that resistance.

I remember about a year or 18 months ago someone had a great diary about how if no one wants an anvil pendulum that business will fail. Let's all remember that demand (from the consumer) creates business activity.

......since the GOP idealogues cite taxes and regs as driving up the cost of adding employees compared to alternatives.
The real problem is their heads-I-win-tails-you-lose philosophy: anything the government does to give the economy a boost, except for lowering taxes and eliminating regulations is INHERENTLY WRONG, regardless of results and evidence because in their world the market is always right and any market distortion is wrong. So if the government engages in a policy that impacts the economy in a positive way they'll tell you that's market distortion and there will be unintended consequences. And if those policies don't have a favorable outcome they'll say the government is incompetent or worse.
Is it even possible to have a rational discussion here?

is that the taxes on the profits a company makes are an incentive to spend the money on the business, instead.  Lower taxes=higher profit taking=less money for equipment, material, and payroll.