The 99%

#51
#51
VOLinthaATL said:
Clever. Nothing to say but this I guess.

Please do explain, the need for repairs will always be there, therefore why can't everyone start their own car repair business?
Click to expand...

Because everyone doesn't have the resources to do so. Starting the business doesn't mean you created the demand for the product or service. The number of workers in a given industry or marketplace isn't dictated by the business owner.

Employers need good, reliable employees as much as those same employees need the employer.
 
#52
#52
2ironVol said:
Because everyone doesn't have the resources to do so. Starting the business doesn't mean you created the demand for the product or service. The number of workers in a given industry or marketplace isn't dictated by the business owner.

Employers need good, reliable employees as much as those same employees need the employer.
Click to expand...

DING, DING, DING! There's hope for you after all. Maybe you do have a clue.

As for the second bolded part, that's dead wrong. Without an employer there is no employee.
 
#53
#53
Gramps said:
What percent of those successful auto body shops business owners are in the top 1% ?

The majority of jobs are created by small business, most small business owners are not in the top 1%.
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether or not they are in the top 1% doesn't matter. Small business didn't create jobs, demand and the marketplace did.
 
#54
#54
Uh.... to say the "demand" created the job is a bit of a stretch. The demand created the opportunity. The employer still created the job.

I still don't like the 1%, and judging from what I've seen out of NEO in the past week or so, I don't like him either, but that is neither here, nor there.
 
#55
#55
2ironVol said:
Regardless of whether or not they are in the top 1% doesn't matter. Small business didn't create jobs, demand and the marketplace did.
Click to expand...

Yes because they're was so much demand for IPhones and IPads before Apple decided to make them.
 
#56
#56
VOLinthaATL said:
DING, DING, DING! There's hope for you after all. Maybe you do have a clue.

As for the second bolded part, that's dead wrong. Without an employer there is no employee.
Click to expand...

Without good employees, a employer wont stay in business........
 
#57
#57
VOLinthaATL said:
DING, DING, DING! There's hope for you after all. Maybe you do have a clue.As for the second bolded part, that's dead wrong. Without an employer there is no employee.
Click to expand...

LOL.. I am still waiting for you to get a clue.

No, I am not dead wrong. I suppose we'll just have to disagree. My point on NEOCON's take is spot on. My take on you is as well.
 
#58
#58
2ironVol said:
Regardless of whether or not they are in the top 1% doesn't matter. Small business didn't create jobs, demand and the marketplace did.
Click to expand...

No it didn't. Demand is just a way to say there was a need. The demand didn't create the job, the supplier did. He is fulfilling the need. He can't do it without a certain amount of demand in the marketplace, but it's absurd to say demand created it. This is like saying gravity created airplanes, because without gravity there is no need.
 
#61
#61
2ironVol said:
LOL.. I am still waiting for you to get a clue.

No, I am not dead wrong. I suppose we'll just have to disagree. My point on NEOCON's take is spot on. My take on you is as well.
Click to expand...

When the going gets tough tell them you're right and they're wrong and be done with it I guess. Nice.
 
#63
#63
VOLinthaATL said:
Yes because they're was so much demand for IPhones and IPads before Apple decided to make them.
Click to expand...

Yes there was much demand. Someone knew people wanted a better product. If you dont think Apple spent some money on market research, you're farther behind than I orignially thought. AND BTW, Apple isn't a small business
 
#65
#65
BearCat204 said:
Thought your stance was that the employees need the employer and should be thankful to them, but not the other way around as well. Maybe I read you wrong.....its possible.
Click to expand...

Employees do need an employer to be employed. I don't understand how that's arguable. Whether said Employer is easy to work for and therefore every employee should be thankful to them is another argument I suppose.
 
#66
#66
2ironVol said:
Yes there was much demand. Someone knew people wanted a better product. If you dont think Apple spent some money on market research, you're farther behind than I orignially thought. AND BTW, Apple isn't a small business
Click to expand...

I do think Apple spent money on market research. What the hell are you talking about? Without Apple creating the IPhone and thus consumer demand for them they would probably need many many less EMPLOYEES without it.
 
#67
#67
VOLinthaATL said:
Employees do need an employer to be employed. I don't understand how that's arguable. Whether said Employer is easy to work for and therefore every employee should be thankful to them is another argument I suppose.
Click to expand...

No you idiot. Once there is market demand, the job is instantaneously created out of thin air. It definitely doesn't require a savvy businessman to identify the demand, risk his wealth by putting skin in the game, and dedicate his life to growing said business.
 
#69
#69
I do not disagree with the argument that OWS should also protest the other side of the ledger here, i.e. DC. But, as the saying goes, follow the money. And the money comes from WS and banks, generally.
 
#70
#70
lawgator1 said:
I do not disagree with the argument that OWS should also protest the other side of the ledger here, i.e. DC. But, as the saying goes, follow the money. And the money comes from WS and banks, generally.
Click to expand...

You mean banks lend capital to start-ups and small businesses so they can research, innovate and create more demand for their products? Say it ain't so! Those *******s!
 
Last edited:
#71
#71
lawgator1 said:
I do not disagree with the argument that OWS should also protest the other side of the ledger here, i.e. DC. But, as the saying goes, follow the money. And the money comes from WS and banks, generally.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....Solyndra* gives a decently hefty sum to Obama's campaign and the Federal government turns around and gives a giant sum to Solyndra. If you follow the money, I think culprit #1 is still DC.

*or pick Republican pet project + Republican president if you so choose
 
#72
#72
VOLinthaATL said:
You mean banks lend capital to start-ups and small businesses so they can research, innovate and create more demand for their products? Say it ain't so! Those *******s!
Click to expand...


No, its the money they spend to own a chunk of Congress.



nbakerld said:
Hmmm....Solyndra* gives a decently hefty sum to Obama's campaign and the Federal government turns around and gives a giant sum to Solyndra. If you follow the money, I think culprit #1 is still DC.

*or pick Republican pet project + Republican president if you so choose
Click to expand...


Ok. Not sure I get your point. I said above both parties do it.
 
#73
#73
lawgator1 said:
Ok. Not sure I get your point. I said above both parties do it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that. My point is if you follow the money, I still think DC is most responsible. They are the ones transferring large sums of our money to favored industries/corporations.
 
#74
#74
nbakerld said:
Yeah, I saw that. My point is if you follow the money, I still think DC is most responsible. They are the ones transferring large sums of our money to favored industries/corporations.
Click to expand...


They are both responsible. I think, though, that it is more palpably outrageous when the guys that ran a company into the ground, bled it dry, screwed over shareholders and employees, and basically gambled it into the ground, then get annual bonuses that are more than any of us see in a lifetime.

Compared to the labyrinth that is the buying of political influence, it is simply a lot easier to identify and focus on the well-publicized and disclosed bonuses to the financiers.
 
#75
#75
VOLinthaATL said:
I do think Apple spent money on market research. What the hell are you talking about? Without Apple creating the IPhone and thus consumer demand for them they would probably need many many less EMPLOYEES without it.
Click to expand...

Based on this post, I think we might be arguing two different points. My apologies. I thought you were arguing Apple created the demand by producing the Iphone itself.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top