Tailgate Debate: "Job Creators" are those who make over $250k...

[Fergasun]

I heard this sound-byte from a national political figure. It ticked me off. Let's assume there's someone, an entrepreneur. He has a job, but he doesn't make $250k. Then all of a sudden through his sweat and hard-work, he makes over $250k running a small business. Was he not a job-creator, and then all of a sudden is? What happens if his business starts go go down, does he cease to become a "job creator"? Secondly, I have a big issue putting all these people up on a pedastool and calling them "job creators". As if when I go and buy a car or spend any money into the economy it doesn't create any jobs, or if I hire people to clean my house or mow my lawn it's not creating any jobs, or if I go to Home Depot and buy parts it doesn't create any jobs.

It might be a convenient way to throw out a 5-second sound-byte and propagate some great talking point for political advantage. But it feels pretty damn condescending to me. What does everyone else think?

[chipwhich]

You have an issue because you don't think small business create jobs?

OK.

[Mickalino]

putting all these people up on a pedastool

Exhibit A =

"Pedastool"

Exhibit B =

"Pedastal"

[Burgold]

You have an issue because you don't think small business create jobs?

OK.

I think he's saying the opposite. I think he's saying that there are job creators who make less than 250 k a year. If so, I agree. Demand creates jobs not rich people.

[Larry]

You have an issue because you don't think small business create jobs?

OK.

You have an issue because you can't read?

OK.

----------

Ferg, I agree with you that it's a great over-simplification. Actually, I'd assert that a lot of it is what I think of a philosophy rather than fact. Some people look at the Redskins and they see a team. (Granted, a dysfunctional one. But that's another matter.) Others see Dan Snyder, who is singlehandedly responsible for everything the Redskins have done since he took over.

Suppose the Redskins make a profit of $50M, this year. Who created it?

IMO, you could argue that that $50M came from the customers. Or you could argue that the Redskins "created" $50M, because they took a bunch of things that cost umpty-ump million, and turned them into something that was worth umpty-ump plus fifty.

And if you argue that the Redskins "created" $50M, then did everybody create it? Or did Dan Snyder create it?

Me, when I hear claims like "so and so created that money", what I hear is class warfare. To me, it's one of the ironies of politics, the number of people who will try to claim that anybody who doesn't think that the rich are the most important people in the world, is "practicing class warfare".

----------

I also think that it's partially rooted in trickle down theory, where the assumption is that if the rich have more money, they'll hire more people.

My problem with that theory is that they assume that, say, the guy that owns the McDonald's, when he's deciding how many people to schedule to work, tomorrow, asks himself "what's the most people I can afford to pay?". But he doesn't. The question he asks is "What's the smallest I can schedule, and not piss off my customers?"

You could triple the owner's pay, and he's not going to hire more people. He doesn't need to. He's making money, just the way it is.

(Although it is true, that if you cut the owner's pay enough, he will say "eff this! I'm losing money." and close the place down.)

----------

In short, yes, I agree with you. It's sound bite rhetoric. One of many in politics.

[Bang]

I think innovation creates jobs by creating small business. And innovation is not reliant on the wealthy nearly as much as it used to be.

~Bang

[Larry]

Exhibit A =

"Pedastool"

Pedastool:

[chipwhich]

You have an issue because you can't read?

OK.

Well there's the pot calling the kettle...but thanks for the insult.

Meanwhile your post is spoken like a true employee, not an owner.

Regardless of an owners compensation, jobs are created by growing businesses. If you want to blame all success on business on the consumer, well ok. Meanwhile, while you sit on your throne and opine, entrepreneurs are out their creating business and ideas which lead to growth and employment.

But lets stunt that, raise taxes, and let the government grow us out of this mess

[Mickalino]

Pedastool:

You win

[AsburySkinsFan]

It is condescending because if the people make over $250k per year are the only one's who create jobs then that means that the only job creators are the top 1% of people in our country, which is an absurd notion. We are all involved in job creation.

[GSF]

I created 5 jobs in 2010, and I don't make 250k, yet.

[Corcaigh]

Many owners of small businesses make nothing like $250K.

[Hubbs]

It's a total joke. What's the number one way to encourage the expansion of a business? Give it big profits. And who forms the vast, vast majority of the customer base for most businesses? Not the $250k+ crowd.

[Burgold]

It is condescending because if the people make over $250k per year are the only one's who create jobs then that means that the only job creators are the top 1% of people in our country, which is an absurd notion.

If you think about it it's worse than that. It's an anti-American notion. It spits in the face of the American Dream and that any Joe Palooka can make it.

[chipwhich]

It is condescending because if the people make over $250k per year are the only one's who create jobs then that means that the only job creators are the top 1% of people in our country, which is an absurd notion.

Show me the link or sound bite where it was said the only ones who create jobs are the top 1%. Thanks.

---------- Post added December-17th-2010 at 09:32 PM ----------

If you think about it it's worse than that. It's an anti-American notion. It spits in the face of the American Dream and that any Joe Palooka can make it.

Wow maybe larry is right. I am idiot who cannot read. I certainly didn't get what you guys are from the OP. Well my first sentence in this post can't be right, but you get my point

---------- Post added December-17th-2010 at 09:34 PM ----------

It's a total joke. What's the number one way to encourage the expansion of a business? Give it big profits. And who forms the vast, vast majority of the customer base for most businesses? Not the $250k+ crowd.

So you are saying if a person making over $250K starts a business. It WILL be successful and profitable because the under 250K crowd will make it so? Am I getting that right Hubbs? Sounds easy to me!

[mojobo]

Capital, innovation, risk taking, competition, and efficiently using resources create jobs. If you successfully do this you will likely make more than $250K a year. But the simple fact that somebody makes over $250k doesn't make them a "job creator" as somebody could have "created" a $250k job.

I think he's saying the opposite. I think he's saying that there are job creators who make less than 250 k a year. If so, I agree. Demand creates jobs not rich people.

Demand does not create jobs, jobs create demand. Basically what an economy is is a bunch of people trading their goods and production to one another. In order to receive the production of another you must first produce something yourself (or use wealth created by another persons wealth).

[Burgold]

Fergasun will have to confirm what he meant. If was saying that he heard this guy say the only job creators are those making 250 k plus... I think it's a false and crazy statement though I suspect it was being said in defense of giving "tax cuts" to all. Likely, what the politico meant was that we shouldn't pick on those making more than 250k because many of them are job creators... and just said it clumsily. The latter is a pretty generic conservative talking point.

Are all rich guys job creators though? Are no poor guys job creators? These blanket statements only have so much value.

[killerbee99]

Capital, innovation, risk taking, competition, and efficiently using resources create jobs. If you successfully do this you will likely make more than $250K a year. But the simple fact that somebody makes over $250k doesn't make them a "job creator" as somebody could have "created" a $250k job.

Demand does not create jobs, jobs create demand. Basically what an economy is is a bunch of people trading their goods and production to one another. In order to receive the production of another you must first produce something yourself (or use wealth created by another persons wealth).

Huh, jobs create demand? I thought with increased demand for services, a business might want to "HIRE" more people to keep up with demand and make more "PROFIT"...just saying...thought that was part of basic Econ

[Burgold]

Demand does not create jobs, jobs create demand.

Methinks you are missing a very basic idea in economics. You can create a job, but if there is no demand for your product or service that job isn't going to last for long. Let's say you create a ballista factory and hire 300,000 people to make ballistas. When your done you're not going to convince anyone in the DOD to buy one nor any security outfit. Your company and all those jobs will very quickly cease to exist. Jobs don't create demand.

[chipwhich]

Are all rich guys job creators though? Are no poor guys job creators? These blanket statements only have so much value.

I know but this is just a circular argument. Are all poor guys job creators and no guys over 250K job creators?

I like mojobo's first sentence above.

Just out of curiosity, what percentage of those making over 250K are business owners/executives and what percentage are employees?

[Burgold]

I know but this is just a circular argument. Are all poor guys job creators and no guys over 250K job creators?

I like mojobo's first sentence above.

Just out of curiosity, what percentage of those making over 250K are business owners/executives and what percentage are employees?

I've no idea... but a lot of NY lawyers make a ton of money and I don't know if they qualify as job creators. I think it's likely that if you make more than 250 k you are directly or indirectly a job creator whether it's by actively hiring people (even at the level of day care) or because the degree of your consumption helps others to hire someone.

And yeah, his first sentence was fine (although the inevitability of making that much money is less than certain. There are great businesses with really hard working people that never quite rise to that level and never will or could)

[chipwhich]

Huh, jobs create demand? I thought with increased demand for services, a business might want to "HIRE" more people to keep up with demand and make more "PROFIT"...just saying...thought that was part of basic Econ

Well sometimes there is a job and a business before there is a demand. That's why there is investment capital money out there. They finance the jobs and the companies in hopes of creating the demand

[Hubbs]

So you are saying if a person making over $250K starts a business. It WILL be successful and profitable because the under 250K crowd will make it so? Am I getting that right Hubbs? Sounds easy to me!

No, I'm saying that most businesses need the under-$250k crowd a lot more than the over-$250k crowd, because the latter is something like 5% of the population. They probably technically select who's hired way more than other income brackets, but businesses ultimately need customers and will either expand or shrink depending on how many customers want to buy any given company's good or service.

[chipwhich]

I've no idea... but a lot of NY lawyers make a ton of money and I don't know if they qualify as job creators. I think it's likely that if you make more than 250 k you are directly or indirectly a job creator whether it's by actively hiring people (even at the level of day care) or because the degree of your consumption helps others to hire someone.

And yeah, his first sentence was fine (although the inevitability of making that much money is less than certain. There are great businesses with really hard working people that never quite rise to that level and never will or could)

Yeah but even a high paid attorney creates jobs. Who do you think does all of their work for them. My wife probably spent 20 years as a legal secretary in some of DC's biggest money law firms. Lawyers have quite a big need for support staff.

[Burgold]

Sheesh... we've gotten to the point where we can't even pick on lawyers! What's happening to the world these days.