Skip to main content

The GOP Litany continues to hold the un-Christian position that the needy should not be helped, so for instance no unemployment insurance benefit extension should exist.  I hope I'm wrong, but I do not expect it to even be voted on in the House, and expect a filibuster in the Senate. A picture is worth a thousand words: since I’m using one this will be a short essay.

Instead of helping the needy, the GOP holds that our tax dollars should reward the deserving – the Mighty Job Creators – and Lo, There Will Be Jobs. Can we check that with actual data? Conveniently the St. Louis Fed has a lot of its data in easily plottable form, or one can download the data in Excel format and plot to one’s heart’s content.

Plotting Corporate Profits After Tax Since 2003 and Total Nonfarm Employees together, if the GOP were correct we’d see a significant and substantial correlation. I have done that exercise, using an index where 2007 values = 100%. The blue line is profits; the red line is employment.

Despite a growing population, total employment is where it was in 2007. Profits, however, are up 60%. Ergo, the GOP is FOS on this issue, and since Job Creators are not creating jobs, we should raise corporate taxes and put people to work on infrastructure and public service.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Since i have concluded that the purpose of federal (7+ / 0-)

    taxes is to return dollars to the Treasury, where they originate, in order to insure that they circulate at a good rate, anyone who's hoarding dollars, whether in vaults or to specualte on stocks with, should pay a significant tax to accomplish that end.
    The argument that anyone needs to accumulate dollars to "create jobs" is faux. Obsessive behavior always has to be explained away and the best explanation is whatever people will buy.
    "Putting people to work" should hardly be a prime objective in a country that's committed to liberty and free enterprise. Putting people to work is what slothful people aim to accomplish so they themselves have to do nothing at all but give orders and issue demands.
    "Creating jobs" is a euphemism and sort of dismissive in that the human beings who are being deprived of the basics (food, shelter, care) are being left out of the equation. At least "no free lunch" is a more honest expression of the attitude that countenances humans in distress with equanimity.
    When people are able to be self-sustaining, they are not employed. They are at liberty and doing their own thing. I am sure the slave holders also perceived themselves as job creators. They made people work, though they themselves did not wield the whip. It wasn't actually free labor, since the work force had to be housed, fed and doctored to keep them healthy. Moreover, the banks who had lent the currency to acquire the plantation and the work force, were looking for a profit and when that wasn't forthcoming they foreclosed. That most plantations eventually went bankrupt and that accounted for the sale of the work force and broke the families up isn't mentioned in the history texts. One suspects too many people might make the leap and recognize the same pattern in effect today. Industrial enterprise gets funded by banks and then bled dry. It was the Dutch bankers that sponsored the importation of a work force from Africa. The Dutch are an industrious culture and so are the Germans. Putting people to work is a much admired talent. Ironic, isn't it?

    Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

    by hannah on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 01:52:36 AM PST

    •  So, investing in stocks is now "hoarding"? (0+ / 0-)

      You would have no one invest in companies any longer?

      I feel I must be missing some snark here.. apologies if that is so.

      •  Welcome. hannah's thoughts require/compel (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JJ In Illinois

        some deeper thinking and 1) becoming aware of then 2) jettisoning many assumptions about how things "work."

        Psychology and macro-economics, especially.  

        If I skim her comments, I miss out.   :o)

        Retired Pie Warrior. Substance over Sh*t Flinging (as best as I am able). Sarcasm for - and derision of - True Believers / Entitlement "Reformers" / NSA cheerleaders (yes, significant overlap) still available 24/7, you betcha!

        by JVolvo on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 09:13:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  If you purchase anything but an initial public (0+ / 0-)

        offering, you're just putting dollars into the pockets of traders and speculators.
        Think of volleyball and keeping the ball in play.

        If you want to read something dense, try this annual report from Plum Creek Timber for 2001, the year they absorbed all the timber holdings of Georgia Pacific and realized a $216 million tax break by reorganizing themselves as a Real Estate Investment Trust. (pdf)

        Back then their stock was at $1.37. Now it's somewhere around $44, but none of those dollars flow back into the company. They're still busy selling swampland to rubes.

        Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

        by hannah on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 01:13:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Only someone in the pocket (10+ / 0-)

    of the very, very rich would call them "job creators."

    The rest of us call them rentiers...and yes, they should be taxed within inches of their vast millions in order to create a more perfect union and ensure domestic tranquility....

    and pay for a government that actually works.

    Or (this is snark) we should exile them all to Somalia.

    (And pity the poor native Somalians.)

    English usage is sometimes more than mere taste, judgment and education - sometimes it's sheer luck, like getting across the street. E. B. White

    by Youffraita on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 01:53:50 AM PST

    •  'Rentier' is spot-on. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos, JVolvo, Redfire, Youffraita

      It's reflective of the endlessly rent-seeking oligopolistic plutocracy that the GOP extolls, deceitfully, as the 'free market.' It is unfettered, or insufficiently fettered, but 'free market' in no way describes what we have.

      There's a million ways to laugh; everyone's a path.

      by Tom Lum Forest on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 07:21:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  We do have a "nanny state" (5+ / 0-)

        But it is nanny to the 1%, to make sure they are cossetted and comforted and well-fed and warm and safe from interaction with the great unwashed and from messy and uncomfortable duties like adhering to a social contract, being subject to the law, paying taxes, paying livable wages and the like.

        The nanny state runs interference for the wealthy at every turn, making sure they are not buffeted by any winds of change that might be blowing. The nanny state provides extra mufflers and galoshes and squeezes their chubby cheeks and praises them for being the Job Creators and Masters of the Universe and don't pay any attention to that noise in the streets, it's just a bunch of that grubby lazy surplus population whining about keeping a roof over their collective heads - ungrateful layabouts!

        “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

        by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 08:35:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Myth? (9+ / 0-)

    The GOP talking point about "Job Creators" is not a myth; it is nothing but a lowdown dirty goddammed fucking LIE.

    Yes I know that I am just arguing semantics.

    This better be good. Because it is not going away.

    by DerAmi on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 01:57:39 AM PST

  •  Everybody knows the term 'Job Creators' .... (5+ / 0-)

    .... is now only used satirically or ironically.

    They're putting the money in their pockets.

    Talk about 'moochers.'

  •  Overseas? Certainly. Here at home? No. (7+ / 0-)

    The latest estimate I've read was close to 2 million jobs off-shored since the start of the recession. That would have taken care of about half the long-term unemployed in this country. But, according to the "job creators," these long-term unemployed have skills that have gone "stale," so better to give work to people who have no skills at all in the designated tasks required, and have to take a year to learn how to do a job, as opposed to those who would need a month or two to come back up to speed. But, the overseas laborers are cheaper per hour, so penny-wise and pound-foolish is obviously the way to go.

    Magical thinking rules, obviously.


  •  What if we rewarded companies that do create jobs? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kurt, radarlady, Tom Lum Forest, JVolvo

    Love the diary! Really effective, and important information, in a format that makes it clear what the problems are. Fabulous!  Not so great is the reality that our current society, and tax system, treat profits as more important than living wage jobs.

    I would like to see us reward companies based on how many living wage jobs, and how much they make a difference in their communities. Forget profits, and look for people who actually create jobs that keep their communities, and the country going, and reward them.  Offer the chance to pay lower taxes, in exchange for creating work programs with the tax money they keep, that train new workers, or increase benefits to current workers! That is the kind of "job creators" I would like to reward!

  •  Hamburgers are hunger creators (10+ / 0-)

    The right is very good in coming up with very short phrases or word salads that takes lots of time to unwind and explain, and they rely on short attention span and lack of interest to keep they myths alive.

    We need to come up with equally short pithy rebuttals. I think a good response to "The rich are job creators " would be "So, hamburgers are hunger creators?".

    Hamburgers are created because there are hungry people who want to eat hamburgers. It is their dollars that pay for the burgers, the salary for employees and the profit of the restaurants.

    If any one rich guy does not want to invest, another one will come along and do the investment and build the restaurant. If you don't believe this, it means you distrust free markets and capitalism.

    We need to stop coddling the rich. The capital markets are sloshing around with excess capital of about 2 trillion dollars in corporations. Private equity has another trillion or so sloshing around without opportunities to invest. Create demand, the jobs will follow.

    Giving more money to people who save more than 90% of their income and denying money to people who routinely spend 100% of their income is the surest way to destroy demand.

    •  Well said! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kevskos, JVolvo, Calamity Jean


      Giving more money to people who save more than 90% of their income and denying money to people who routinely spend 100% of their income is the surest way to destroy demand.

      There's a million ways to laugh; everyone's a path.

      by Tom Lum Forest on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 07:25:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tom Lum Forest
      If any one rich guy does not want to invest, another one will come along and do the investment and build the restaurant.
      They love to share horror stories of small business owners selling their business because they don't understand the ACA, but ignore that investors are buying those same businesses because they do understand the ACA.

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 11:22:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site