MoonF18

I agree that it was in context to the subsidies that deter real capitalism, the free flow of goods and the markets determining the real price and demand of goods. Besides, he is a Marine and Marines NEVER unilaterally disarm.

jungle

"That's where all wealth comes from . . . It's not from the government. It's from invention and entrepreneurship and innovation. And our policies promote a legal and regulatory system which impedes our ability to grow entrepreneurship. Lastly, if we want to make [America's workers] wealthier we have to quit demonizing quote, big corporations."

Fred has it right, if we don't light a fire under government they are going to continue to destroy the very thing that has made the US great. Government never made a dime and never created a job, it is highly unlikely they will do so in the future.

MEMFO4Ever

Unrestricted Free Trade. Unrestricted Immigration. Elimination of Corporate Taxes. Sounds like Utopia for all the rich folks.

I'm sure unrestricted corporations running roughshot over the populace will turn out much better than the financial situation. I have no faith in someone that isn't afraid of missing their next mortgage payment.

A rich guy telling me how good I have it; priceless. That being said, thank God Fred is at FedEx. If he wasn't I would be working somewhere else.

jungle

Sorry you feel that you have been run over "roughshot" by Purple.

I didn't read any mention of unrestricted immigration, his point was that it should be restricted to those who would provide a clear benefit to the country.
Corporate taxes-one of my favorites. I take it you believe that if Exxon is taxed at a higher rate you won't be paying the difference at the pump and that you aren't already paying those taxes every time you buy gasoline?

I think Fred is telling us that many of the obstacles placed in the path of our collective economic well-being could easily be removed and would benefit both the individual and the economy as a whole.

MEMA300

Gov. never created a job? I would be willing to bet you have actually been employed by the government at one time. At least 80 percent of purple pilots have been employed by the government that apparently has never created a job. Give me a break.

jagplt

hmmm he seems to be pretty smart that Fred guy....

... uh you do know he's management right?

jungle

The taxpayers created those jobs as a service they felt they required. The government can only confiscate and redistribute-they do not generate wealth except on the back of industry.

Every Postal job is one less at UPS/Fedex.

It is a mistake to believe that government "creates" industry, economic prosperity, generates jobs out of thin air, or in any way contributes to the economy. Except by staying largely out of the way.

MEMA300

Just like a business. A business can not create a job out of thin air either. There has to be some need or service that can be satisfied. Taxpayers, customers, whatever you wanna call it.

jungle

Actually it is the opposite of a business. A business must raise and pay for money to start meeting a demand for goods or services. Government merely confiscates it, and frequently there is no demand for the goods or services offered. Indeed, they would be unsaleable in a free market.

Some functions of our government are described in our constitution-defense and a few administrative tasks. Calling anything beyond that a job is quite a stretch. You might quite handily call it socialism though.

LivingInMEM

Do you really equate the two, or was this a sarcastic comment?

When a corporation grows and creates more jobs, the jobs are paid from revenue generated by the exchange of goods (goods that have had some value added by the corporation whether it was in the form of converting raw materials into a finished product or in transporting a finished product to market and presenting it for sale) or the exchange of services. The transfer of funds from the customer to the corporation occured at the exchange of goods or services. The addition of jobs by the corporation does not cost the customer any more money, it costs the corporation in higher labor costs (of course, the corporation has determined that the productivity gain by the employer overrides the increase in labor costs). The customer pays the market price of the goods regardless of how many employers the corporation has, although ecomony of scale usually allows larger corporations to offer reduced prices while still making a profit. And the best part is, if I don't want or need the service or product, I don't have to contribute to their salaries.

Governments on the other hand pay their new "employees" (civil servants) with the money of the people, money that has been confiscated by force (or threat of force or imprisonment if you fail to comply). Any additional jobs created by the gov't costs us more money - i.e., how much we have to pay is determined solely by the expenditures of the gov't, and the expenditures of the gov't are in a large part determined by the number of gov't employees. As more gov't employees are added, the gov't is forced to take more of my money by force - or borrow for the funding and force my children or grandchildren to ultimately pay for their salaries. Whether or not I receive any added value or any product of the new employees and whether or not the new employees add value to the services provided, I have to pay my share of the gov't employee costs.

So, to recap: I only pay for a corporation employees' salaries if I exchange my money for their product or services. For the gov't, I pay for their employees' salaries whether I benefit from the labor or not. And no, not every gov't employee provides a service that I benefit from in some way or another - some are pure waste, and I still pay their salary.