FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Hillary Clinton: Corporations and businesses don't create jobs

Hillary Clinton: Corporations and businesses don't create jobs

(1:24) October 24, 2014: Former First Lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attacks the theory of trickle down economics at a Democratic rally in Boston.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1145 days ago)

she don't really mean it though

ReplyVote up (348)down (296)
Original comment

she don't really mean it though

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
iknowlessthanyoudo iknowlessthanyoudo (1142 days ago)

Tru dat. Spewing same speeches as Bill insincerely hopefully will keep the public from electing this demon in sheep's clothing. Soon as she's elected, she'll have the NSA up our butts so deep will be wishing for the good old days when the corporate elite at least attempted to be discrete about pulling the strings of their puppets in Washington.

ReplyVote up (330)down (308)
Original comment

Tru dat. Spewing same speeches as Bill insincerely hopefully will keep the public from electing this demon in sheep's clothing. Soon as she's elected, she'll have the NSA up our butts so deep will be wishing for the good old days when the corporate elite at least attempted to be discrete about pulling the strings of their puppets in Washington.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Shirl (516 days ago)
Latest comment: Thkinnig like that is really amazing
ReplyVote up (101)down (99)
Original comment
Latest comment: Thkinnig like that is really amazing
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1145 days ago)

She's not wrong. Businesses are designed to create profit, not jobs. As a business grows, it comes to the point where creating profit means shedding jobs, either by outsourcing or replacing with technology.

If businesses were limited in size, if there was a monopolies commission that actually worked, if the values of CEOs was more like Elon Musk than the Koch brothers - we could all be happy bunnies for ever after.

And as for trickle down economics, if that worked, the super rich wouldn't be getting richer at a super rate, while the rest of us stay the same or get poorer.

ReplyVote up (302)down (307)
Original comment

She's not wrong. Businesses are designed to create profit, not jobs. As a business grows, it comes to the point where creating profit means shedding jobs, either by outsourcing or replacing with technology.

If businesses were limited in size, if there was a monopolies commission that actually worked, if the values of CEOs was more like Elon Musk than the Koch brothers - we could all be happy bunnies for ever after.

And as for trickle down economics, if that worked, the super rich wouldn't be getting richer at a super rate, while the rest of us stay the same or get poorer.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1145 days ago)

"She's not wrong. Businesses are designed to create profit, not jobs." Yes but the facts are that businesses do employ the majority of the people.

Only 4.3 million people work in government jobs. LINK and just the retail sector alone had 15.7 million jobs. LINK There were 8 million employees in the financial sector LINK

In 2013 alone the Koch companies employed 60,000 people. When you factor in their suppliers that have jobs because of their companies, they support 201,000 jobs.

ReplyVote up (314)down (304)
Original comment

"She's not wrong. Businesses are designed to create profit, not jobs." Yes but the facts are that businesses do employ the majority of the people.

Only 4.3 million people work in government jobs. LINK and just the retail sector alone had 15.7 million jobs. LINK There were 8 million employees in the financial sector LINK

In 2013 alone the Koch companies employed 60,000 people. When you factor in their suppliers that have jobs because of their companies, they support 201,000 jobs.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1144 days ago)

Joint stock corporations are designed to maximise profit - that is their raison d'etre. If the most effective way for them to do so is to employ people then they will do that (albeit only incidentally), but if it requires making all the human beings redundant, then that is what they will do instead.

There are entities which do have the profit motive as their main purpose and government is one of those things. Generally-speaking that's why jobs in the public sector are more secure, but governments are not well suited to undertaking commercial activities (cf. the disasters of nationalised British Leyland, British Rail, British Steel and the NCB in the 1970s) where employing too many people means you become inefficient, uncompetitive and you end up losing all the jobs anyway to China or Korea.

ReplyVote up (313)down (304)
Original comment

Joint stock corporations are designed to maximise profit - that is their raison d'etre. If the most effective way for them to do so is to employ people then they will do that (albeit only incidentally), but if it requires making all the human beings redundant, then that is what they will do instead.

There are entities which do have the profit motive as their main purpose and government is one of those things. Generally-speaking that's why jobs in the public sector are more secure, but governments are not well suited to undertaking commercial activities (cf. the disasters of nationalised British Leyland, British Rail, British Steel and the NCB in the 1970s) where employing too many people means you become inefficient, uncompetitive and you end up losing all the jobs anyway to China or Korea.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1144 days ago)

Hillary Clinton is not wrong, but this edited clip doesn't tell the full story.

Small businesses create jobs as they expand. But it comes to a point where it is more cost effective to outsource to China or invest in technology.

But the underlying problem is the profit motive, because that is the wrong incentive to create a buoyant economy in a species riddled with greed.

If businesses' priority was to provide a great service to its clients, and to society, and that profits were the side effect of doing great business, we'd all be happy bunnies and the economy would be much more healthy, the climate more stable, there would be less wars, and less terrorism.

And the super rich would still be very rich, although probably a different breed.

ReplyVote up (307)down (309)
Original comment

Hillary Clinton is not wrong, but this edited clip doesn't tell the full story.

Small businesses create jobs as they expand. But it comes to a point where it is more cost effective to outsource to China or invest in technology.

But the underlying problem is the profit motive, because that is the wrong incentive to create a buoyant economy in a species riddled with greed.

If businesses' priority was to provide a great service to its clients, and to society, and that profits were the side effect of doing great business, we'd all be happy bunnies and the economy would be much more healthy, the climate more stable, there would be less wars, and less terrorism.

And the super rich would still be very rich, although probably a different breed.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1144 days ago)

Of course businesses are motivated to make a profit. That is why they are in business. There are some exceptions such as my electric company (they are a co-op) and credit unions. However, corporations that take investor money to get started must make a profit or nobody will want to invest in them.

It sounds like you would rather all companies be owned by the government like in a communist economy. That does not work and is the reason the Soviet Union fell.

ReplyVote up (331)down (292)
Original comment

Of course businesses are motivated to make a profit. That is why they are in business. There are some exceptions such as my electric company (they are a co-op) and credit unions. However, corporations that take investor money to get started must make a profit or nobody will want to invest in them.

It sounds like you would rather all companies be owned by the government like in a communist economy. That does not work and is the reason the Soviet Union fell.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1143 days ago)

I didn't mention anything about companies being owned by governments. That's just your lack of imagination.

I would rather companies were run by people who cared about the consequences of their company's actions on society and their staff.

ReplyVote up (311)down (292)
Original comment

I didn't mention anything about companies being owned by governments. That's just your lack of imagination.

I would rather companies were run by people who cared about the consequences of their company's actions on society and their staff.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1143 days ago)

Who would invest or startup a company to not make any money? That would certainly be a completely waste of time. Only the government of the UK and other socialist and communist countries are stupid enough to do that.

ReplyVote up (296)down (318)
Original comment

Who would invest or startup a company to not make any money? That would certainly be a completely waste of time. Only the government of the UK and other socialist and communist countries are stupid enough to do that.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1143 days ago)

Again, I never mentioned anything about not making money. Just that companies should have a positive impact on society and their staff. What's the problem with that?

ReplyVote up (323)down (301)
Original comment

Again, I never mentioned anything about not making money. Just that companies should have a positive impact on society and their staff. What's the problem with that?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
cengland0 cengland0 (1143 days ago)

"companies should have a positive impact on society and their staff." Most companies do have a positive impact on society. They provide a product or service that is wanted by the public. If they fail to provide products or services that are wanted, they will fail as a company.

They do provide a positive impact on their staff. If they did not, the staff would leave and go find a job elsewhere. This is the great beauty of a free market where the public is free to decide who to buy their products and services from and who to work for. The public determines with their wallet which companies go bankrupt and which ones thrive.

From previous messages of yours I know you hate McDonalds and Walmart and all banks. In that case, stop using those companies and convince all your friends to do the same. If you can get enough people to boycott those companies, they will either have to change their business model or go bankrupt.

ReplyVote up (334)down (293)
Original comment

"companies should have a positive impact on society and their staff." Most companies do have a positive impact on society. They provide a product or service that is wanted by the public. If they fail to provide products or services that are wanted, they will fail as a company.

They do provide a positive impact on their staff. If they did not, the staff would leave and go find a job elsewhere. This is the great beauty of a free market where the public is free to decide who to buy their products and services from and who to work for. The public determines with their wallet which companies go bankrupt and which ones thrive.

From previous messages of yours I know you hate McDonalds and Walmart and all banks. In that case, stop using those companies and convince all your friends to do the same. If you can get enough people to boycott those companies, they will either have to change their business model or go bankrupt.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Casey (1145 days ago)

I can hardly beleive my ears, the fact that she can come out and make such a ridiculous claim and is not booed off the stage is amazing. What, they think govt. creates jobs!? That anyone could believe that rubbish is also astounding. As for "businesses are designed to create profits not jobs" let's hear what Adam Smith had to say " By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." You think every business should be non profit Walter? How many businesses, and hence JOBS, would be created in such a world? The answer is none! Musk can NOW afford to be generous in his wealth but he wasn't always so

ReplyVote up (295)down (306)
Original comment

I can hardly beleive my ears, the fact that she can come out and make such a ridiculous claim and is not booed off the stage is amazing. What, they think govt. creates jobs!? That anyone could believe that rubbish is also astounding. As for "businesses are designed to create profits not jobs" let's hear what Adam Smith had to say " By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." You think every business should be non profit Walter? How many businesses, and hence JOBS, would be created in such a world? The answer is none! Musk can NOW afford to be generous in his wealth but he wasn't always so

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: ghostlyghost (1142 days ago)

Consumers create jobs. Businesses make more money by paying their employees less. If you pay people more they buy more creating more jobs.

ReplyVote up (330)down (302)
Original comment

Consumers create jobs. Businesses make more money by paying their employees less. If you pay people more they buy more creating more jobs.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (1142 days ago)

Brilliantly succinct observation, but it's a bit deep for right wingers to grasp.

ReplyVote up (313)down (300)
Original comment

Brilliantly succinct observation, but it's a bit deep for right wingers to grasp.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Casey (1139 days ago)

And how do you think they will cover the expense of higher wages? By raising the price of what ever they make! DUH! Which puts those on fixed incomes, like the retired and elderly, the least able to adapt to higher prices, at a distinct disadvantage. The idiocy of liberals. Higher wages, higher taxes etc. Are a drag on businesses meaning they are a drag on the economy meaning less jobs, lower wages, lower bonuses etc.

ReplyVote up (256)down (277)
Original comment

And how do you think they will cover the expense of higher wages? By raising the price of what ever they make! DUH! Which puts those on fixed incomes, like the retired and elderly, the least able to adapt to higher prices, at a distinct disadvantage. The idiocy of liberals. Higher wages, higher taxes etc. Are a drag on businesses meaning they are a drag on the economy meaning less jobs, lower wages, lower bonuses etc.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (1144 days ago)

Just look into norway's Statoil company to see the alternative to privately owned corporations.

The statoil model can be applied in any sector of the economy.

ReplyVote up (317)down (294)
Original comment

Just look into norway's Statoil company to see the alternative to privately owned corporations.

The statoil model can be applied in any sector of the economy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
What is Tencent?
What is Tencent?
Imagine the world if electricity was free
Imagine the world if electricity was free
Brexit, what next after divorce deal?
Brexit, what next after divorce deal?
Is Elon Musk's huge battery in South Australia a waste of money?
Is Elon Musk's huge battery in South Australia a waste of money?
Free money for everybody? UBI explained.
Free money for everybody? UBI explained.