bripat9643: Dumbest liberal statements in USMB "Demand creates jobs"

[oldfart]

Labor always comes before capital? What does that statement mean? If I'm a laborer and I've been hired to dig ditches to install an irrigation system for a new housing development...do you really think that I get hired BEFORE the financing for that new development has been nailed down? What are they telling me...that I should start working and cross my fingers that they can work out the financials? I'm sorry but that's simply not the way things work. Capital comes first and is used to hire labor. If you have no investor...then you have no jobs.

The phrase comes from Abraham Lincoln. At the time, the Classical economic model used a modification of the labor theory of value, where physical capital is created by labor, becoming "indirect capital". This was the origin of the Swedish School which became the Austian School of Capital which morphed into the Austrian School of political economy (Bohm-Bawerk and Menger to von Mises and Hayek). The Marxist theory of labor spun off about forty years later.

If you assert that capital comes first, you have no support from any economist since the physiocrats in the 1740's. Good luck with that. Everyone from Adam Smith forward disagrees with you.

 

[Camp]

Labor always comes before capital? What does that statement mean? If I'm a laborer and I've been hired to dig ditches to install an irrigation system for a new housing development...do you really think that I get hired BEFORE the financing for that new development has been nailed down? What are they telling me...that I should start working and cross my fingers that they can work out the financials? I'm sorry but that's simply not the way things work. Capital comes first and is used to hire labor. If you have no investor...then you have no jobs.

The phrase comes from Abraham Lincoln. At the time, the Classical economic model used a modification of the labor theory of value, where physical capital is created by labor, becoming "indirect capital". This was the origin of the Swedish School which became the Austian School of Capital which morphed into the Austrian School of political economy (Bohm-Bawerk and Menger to von Mises and Hayek). The Marxist theory of labor spun off about forty years later.

If you assert that capital comes first, you have no support from any economist since the physiocrats in the 1740's. Good luck with that. Everyone from Adam Smith forward disagrees with you.

Hey, I'm just arguing that demand for a service or product is the key element needed to create a job. I am at a loss to understand why so many folks act like that is some kind or weirdo evil idea. I consider the whole topic to be silly humor and am amazed that I am debating about economics.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sigh. Grow the fuck up. Yes, bankers, as you think, are almost as vital as farmers. Actually they are far less.

Labor always comes before capital.

When you can think, unlike most of the Neanderthal 19th century far right brains on this Board, come back and talk to us.

Labor always comes before capital? What does that statement mean? If I'm a laborer and I've been hired to dig ditches to install an irrigation system for a new housing development...do you really think that I get hired BEFORE the financing for that new development has been nailed down? What are they telling me...that I should start working and cross my fingers that they can work out the financials? I'm sorry but that's simply not the way things work. Capital comes first and is used to hire labor. If you have no investor...then you have no jobs.

Guess you never worked in housing construction with contractors. Hell, all kinds of business deals get put together that have no actual exchanges of funds, but rather on the expectation on the promises of funds. The funds are assumed because a prediction is made of a demand that will occur when and if a service or product is provided.

Please give me the name of a few of these contractors

 

[Oldstyle]

Labor always comes before capital? What does that statement mean? If I'm a laborer and I've been hired to dig ditches to install an irrigation system for a new housing development...do you really think that I get hired BEFORE the financing for that new development has been nailed down? What are they telling me...that I should start working and cross my fingers that they can work out the financials? I'm sorry but that's simply not the way things work. Capital comes first and is used to hire labor. If you have no investor...then you have no jobs.

The phrase comes from Abraham Lincoln. At the time, the Classical economic model used a modification of the labor theory of value, where physical capital is created by labor, becoming "indirect capital". This was the origin of the Swedish School which became the Austian School of Capital which morphed into the Austrian School of political economy (Bohm-Bawerk and Menger to von Mises and Hayek). The Marxist theory of labor spun off about forty years later.

If you assert that capital comes first, you have no support from any economist since the physiocrats in the 1740's. Good luck with that. Everyone from Adam Smith forward disagrees with you.

Hey, I'm just arguing that demand for a service or product is the key element needed to create a job. I am at a loss to understand why so many folks act like that is some kind or weirdo evil idea. I consider the whole topic to be silly humor and am amazed that I am debating about economics.

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

 

[rdean]

Come on USMB Republicans. You don't really believe that "Demand creates jobs" is "dumb". Are you really letting Teanuts talk FOR you?

 

[percysunshine]

I have to hand it to you rdean. You have taken market forces into account, and are selling stupidity at an optimal supply/demand price point.

.

 

[Camp]

The phrase comes from Abraham Lincoln. At the time, the Classical economic model used a modification of the labor theory of value, where physical capital is created by labor, becoming "indirect capital". This was the origin of the Swedish School which became the Austian School of Capital which morphed into the Austrian School of political economy (Bohm-Bawerk and Menger to von Mises and Hayek). The Marxist theory of labor spun off about forty years later.

If you assert that capital comes first, you have no support from any economist since the physiocrats in the 1740's. Good luck with that. Everyone from Adam Smith forward disagrees with you.

Hey, I'm just arguing that demand for a service or product is the key element needed to create a job. I am at a loss to understand why so many folks act like that is some kind or weirdo evil idea. I consider the whole topic to be silly humor and am amazed that I am debating about economics.

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

 

[rdean]

Hey, I'm just arguing that demand for a service or product is the key element needed to create a job. I am at a loss to understand why so many folks act like that is some kind or weirdo evil idea. I consider the whole topic to be silly humor and am amazed that I am debating about economics.

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Hmmm, I'm not 100% sure I agree with you on this one. Seems here the "demand" is leisure. Having someplace to "relax". It doesn't produce a good or service, but it does give peace of mind. And spending the day relaxing and having fun can't really be assigned a "price".

 

[percysunshine]

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Hmmm, I'm not 100% sure I agree with you on this one. Seems here the "demand" is leisure. Having someplace to "relax". It doesn't produce a good or service, but it does give peace of mind. And spending the day relaxing and having fun can't really be assigned a "price".

Sure it can. Spending a day relaxing and having fun can be contrasted with other possible ways to spend a day. The word 'spend' is a key component of the concept.

.

 

[Oldstyle]

Hey, I'm just arguing that demand for a service or product is the key element needed to create a job. I am at a loss to understand why so many folks act like that is some kind or weirdo evil idea. I consider the whole topic to be silly humor and am amazed that I am debating about economics.

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Ah, Camp? I already pointed out that both government and non-profits can operate without a profit motive but only because they are subsidized by the taxpayers. Of course you can "create" jobs when you are the government because YOU don't pay for those jobs...someone else does! You could also just give those people money instead of a job. The reason government is able to do that is because they have revenues coming in from taxpayers. Show me where jobs are created in the Private Sector without anticipated profit.

 

[Camp]

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Ah, Camp? I already pointed out that both government and non-profits can operate without a profit motive but only because they are subsidized by the taxpayers. Of course you can "create" jobs when you are the government because YOU don't pay for those jobs...someone else does! You could also just give those people money instead of a job. The reason government is able to do that is because they have revenues coming in from taxpayers. Show me where jobs are created in the Private Sector without anticipated profit.

I have not disagreed with the profit motive being key in creating jobs, nor have I argued anything regarding economics. I have only supported the OP in showing the stupidity of denying that demand is a key element. My examples of government and non profit jobs are only used to tilt the thought into the realization that while profit motive is a key, demand is the absolute key that can not be left out. Demand as a key element is absolute, profit is not.

 

[Camp]

And I'm simply pointing out that demand is not the key element needed to create a job because you can have demand and yet not create a single job if there is no anticipation of profit.

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Hmmm, I'm not 100% sure I agree with you on this one. Seems here the "demand" is leisure. Having someplace to "relax". It doesn't produce a good or service, but it does give peace of mind. And spending the day relaxing and having fun can't really be assigned a "price".

The good or service provided are the facilities I mentioned. Restrooms, life guards, trash bins, parking lot, safe environment, etc. If the folks just showed up at some random spot, a demand would be met, but no jobs created unless somebody decided to take advantage of the situation and instigate a money making endeavor based on the crowd attendance. In that case, demand would have created an unexpected job.

 

[rdean]

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Hmmm, I'm not 100% sure I agree with you on this one. Seems here the "demand" is leisure. Having someplace to "relax". It doesn't produce a good or service, but it does give peace of mind. And spending the day relaxing and having fun can't really be assigned a "price".

The good or service provided are the facilities I mentioned. Restrooms, life guards, trash bins, parking lot, safe environment, etc. If the folks just showed up at some random spot, a demand would be met, but no jobs created unless somebody decided to take advantage of the situation and instigate a money making endeavor based on the crowd attendance. In that case, demand would have created an unexpected job.

I agree.

But just showing up at some random spot with no restrooms, trash bins and so on? What a drag. We did that in the military. And if you didn't have enough paper to satisfy that demand, you went without a sock.

 

[Oldstyle]

I can give examples of jobs created by demand but without profits realized or even anticipated. You can not give example of jobs created without real or anticipated demand for the service of product being produced.

When a town of community decides to create a public beach on a strip of seashore or lake, they will invest in various equipment and furnishings, perhaps build a parking lot, install rest rooms and hire hire life guards and maintenance, etc. There is no projected or anticipated profit. In fact, the operation will operate at a loss to the community or town. Still, jobs are created. The same scenario occurs when a public park is built or established.

Ah, Camp? I already pointed out that both government and non-profits can operate without a profit motive but only because they are subsidized by the taxpayers. Of course you can "create" jobs when you are the government because YOU don't pay for those jobs...someone else does! You could also just give those people money instead of a job. The reason government is able to do that is because they have revenues coming in from taxpayers. Show me where jobs are created in the Private Sector without anticipated profit.

I have not disagreed with the profit motive being key in creating jobs, nor have I argued anything regarding economics. I have only supported the OP in showing the stupidity of denying that demand is a key element. My examples of government and non profit jobs are only used to tilt the thought into the realization that while profit motive is a key, demand is the absolute key that can not be left out. Demand as a key element is absolute, profit is not.

The original poster didn't claim that demand was "a" key element...oh, no...Deanie declared that demand was "the" element responsible for every single job created throughout history.

"My personal opinion is that demand if the foundation of every single job ever created in the entire 6,000 year history of the world."

Man has been on earth for an estimated 200,000 years by the way so I guess Deanie is as ignorant about THAT as he is about economics.

As I've pointed out before...you can have incredible amounts of demand for something yet if it can't be produced and sold at a profit then it will not be produced at all and no jobs will be created. Anticipation of profit is absolutely the key element to job creation!

 

[bripat9643]

Ah, Camp? I already pointed out that both government and non-profits can operate without a profit motive but only because they are subsidized by the taxpayers. Of course you can "create" jobs when you are the government because YOU don't pay for those jobs...someone else does! You could also just give those people money instead of a job. The reason government is able to do that is because they have revenues coming in from taxpayers. Show me where jobs are created in the Private Sector without anticipated profit.

I have not disagreed with the profit motive being key in creating jobs, nor have I argued anything regarding economics. I have only supported the OP in showing the stupidity of denying that demand is a key element. My examples of government and non profit jobs are only used to tilt the thought into the realization that while profit motive is a key, demand is the absolute key that can not be left out. Demand as a key element is absolute, profit is not.

The original poster didn't claim that demand was "a" key element...oh, no...Deanie declared that demand was "the" element responsible for every single job created throughout history.

"My personal opinion is that demand if the foundation of every single job ever created in the entire 6,000 year history of the world."

Man has been on earth for an estimated 200,000 years by the way so I guess Deanie is as ignorant about THAT as he is about economics.

As I've pointed out before...you can have incredible amounts of demand for something yet if it can't be produced and sold at a profit then it will not be produced at all and no jobs will be created. Anticipation of profit is absolutely the key element to job creation!

It would make as much sense to claim that air is an essential element in every job created since without air we would all be dead. The significance of saying "demand is an essential element" is zero because it's something that is always there, just as the earth is always there. It's a given. Nothing policy makers do can change the kind of demand that deanie is talking about.

 

[Oldstyle]

What's sad about Deanie's obsession about "demand" is that he's trying to use it as a reason to ignore the role of profit in a free market economy. It's the same mind set that's made this Administration so bad at job creation that they had to invent the whole "jobs created or saved" joke of a statistic to mask their failure. Liberals have a fervent belief that profit is somehow evil and needs to be eliminated as much as possible for the "good of the people". Then they sit there and scratch their heads trying to understand why they can't induce growth in the economy or create jobs.

 

[rdean]

Ah, Camp? I already pointed out that both government and non-profits can operate without a profit motive but only because they are subsidized by the taxpayers. Of course you can "create" jobs when you are the government because YOU don't pay for those jobs...someone else does! You could also just give those people money instead of a job. The reason government is able to do that is because they have revenues coming in from taxpayers. Show me where jobs are created in the Private Sector without anticipated profit.

I have not disagreed with the profit motive being key in creating jobs, nor have I argued anything regarding economics. I have only supported the OP in showing the stupidity of denying that demand is a key element. My examples of government and non profit jobs are only used to tilt the thought into the realization that while profit motive is a key, demand is the absolute key that can not be left out. Demand as a key element is absolute, profit is not.

The original poster didn't claim that demand was "a" key element...oh, no...Deanie declared that demand was "the" element responsible for every single job created throughout history.

"My personal opinion is that demand if the foundation of every single job ever created in the entire 6,000 year history of the world."

Man has been on earth for an estimated 200,000 years by the way so I guess Deanie is as ignorant about THAT as he is about economics.

As I've pointed out before...you can have incredible amounts of demand for something yet if it can't be produced and sold at a profit then it will not be produced at all and no jobs will be created. Anticipation of profit is absolutely the key element to job creation!

It is. So far, no one has named a job that didn't start with demand. Even picking up cigarette butts.

 

[rdean]

What's sad about Deanie's obsession about "demand" is that he's trying to use it as a reason to ignore the role of profit in a free market economy. It's the same mind set that's made this Administration so bad at job creation that they had to invent the whole "jobs created or saved" joke of a statistic to mask their failure. Liberals have a fervent belief that profit is somehow evil and needs to be eliminated as much as possible for the "good of the people". Then they sit there and scratch their heads trying to understand why they can't induce growth in the economy or create jobs.

Clearly, if you don't understand "Supply and Demand", then you have zero knowledge of economics.

 

[rdean]

Even the ridiculous notion that job CREATORS create jobs just for fun and out of the goodness of their divine hearts proves that it starts with demand. The CREATORS demand a profit for anything they invest in. "Losing money" is out of the question.

It's no coincidence Republicans call them "job CREATORS".

 

[Oldstyle]

What's sad about Deanie's obsession about "demand" is that he's trying to use it as a reason to ignore the role of profit in a free market economy. It's the same mind set that's made this Administration so bad at job creation that they had to invent the whole "jobs created or saved" joke of a statistic to mask their failure. Liberals have a fervent belief that profit is somehow evil and needs to be eliminated as much as possible for the "good of the people". Then they sit there and scratch their heads trying to understand why they can't induce growth in the economy or create jobs.

Clearly, if you don't understand "Supply and Demand", then you have zero knowledge of economics.

I took the subject in college. You, quite obviously have gleaned what little knowledge you have of economics from sites like Think Progress and The Huffington Post. Please don't embarrass yourself by trying to pass yourself off as an authority on something that you so clearly know little to nothing about!