I liked your earlier version of this post. That could have kept us busy until the new topics come out Monday morning. You ruined at least another 5 pages worth of ranting with that retraction.
I've made several jokes on this thread and I don't think any of them landed, so I think I was going for a more reactionary religious comment to get negative feedback if I couldn't get positive feedback. Looking for a negative reaction is bordering on trolling, hence my retraction.
I must note, Apple COULD potentially have a lot of children locked up somewhere under the sever farm, answering your Siri questions. Could. That's job creation for you there bud.
I've made several jokes on this thread and I don't think any of them landed, so I think I was going for a more reactionary religious comment to get negative feedback if I couldn't get positive feedback. Looking for a negative reaction is bordering on trolling, hence my retraction.
Oh well it would have been entertaining. I might as well go clean up my garage. BTW there is no "J" in Hebrew.
I must note, Apple COULD potentially have a lot of children locked up somewhere under the sever farm, answering your Siri questions. Could. That's job creation for you there bud.
Add to that the money made for supplying gruel for those children. And the Grubby & Tattered Clothing Company(tm) should do well also.
Hi tech companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook etc. do not create many jobs compared to big corporations of the past. Anybody looking for these kind of companies to put many people to work doesn't really know what they're talking about.
To put this in context, the Economist recently noted that Apple, Amazon, and Google together employ 113,000 people--which is less than 1/3rd as many as a single American success-story from the prior generation, GM, employed in 1980.
But isn't that the fact that for one, they pay higher? I mean, even if GM and Apple had the same income, Apple is paying over $60,000 a year...right? They usually require advanced degrees, or at least supeior intellectual knowledge.
Even the higher income folks may not improve the town itself. I'm not sure how far away they are from the nearest wealthy area, but I'm sure that won't creat new homes (BTW, I'm responding ot another poster on this).
For example, here in St. Louis, many high income earners in Ladue, MO work in St. Louis city. So I'd imagine this could be the scenario where the job is just in a partiular city but not necessarliy imporiving that residing town in any way.
"From the day we arrive on the planet And blinking , step into the sun There's more to be seen than can ever be......IT'S THE CIRCLE OF LIFEEEEEEEEEE! AND YOU LOSE CONTROOOOOOOOOL!!!!
But isn't that the fact that for one, they pay higher? I mean, even if GM and Apple had the same income, Apple is paying over $60,000 a year...right? They usually require advanced degrees, or at least supeior intellectual knowledge.
No, it has nothing to do with the fact that they pay higher. It only means that Apple doesn't need thousands of people to make this datacenter operate, while some inefficient car companies (forced to be inefficient by union rules... just ask Toyota how many employees are truly needed to make a car) need more.
In a town of a reported 3,400 adults, 50 jobs represents a potential employment increase of 1.47%. Every little bit helps, do the math.
Yes, let's do the math.
However, start by realizing that in a city of 3400, not all of them are working. If the total population was 3400, then probably only 1,000 to 1500 are working. If it really was 3400 adults, then probably only 2,000 are working. That makes the percentage higher.
Furthermore, Apple stated that 50 direct employees would be hired, but another 250 in contract services (presumably landscaping, security, janitorial, etc). 300 new jobs in a city where 1,000 to 2,000 people are working is a LOT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I don't understand what the local expected. If you own a furniture store, a gas station, or some other local business, Apple is not going to hire you, and put you to work in their data center, but wouldn't the people they did hire need furniture, gas, food, etc? Wouldn't that money go back to the local economy?
Obviously, but that's too simplistic for some people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
It's called the fair tax {a high, flat sales tax on everything}. And anyone who looks at it thinks it's the best (except CPAs who deal specifically with individuals and IRS agents- because they'd be out of work).
Actually, I don't think that's fair at all. It means that the people who can least afford it are most heavily burdened as a percentage of their income. To me, a fair tax would be:
- No deductions at all
- First $50,000 of income exempted
- Next $200,000 of income taxed at 10%.
- Remainder taxed at 20% (or whatever it takes to balance things out)
- Capital gains taxed at normal income tax rates, but indexed for inflation
Before going bonkers, realize that very few people earning under $50 K pay any taxes under the current system (some actually get money back even if they don't pay taxes).
How many people worked on building the great wall of China or the pyramids? Millions! Things must have been much better back then since there were more jobs... well for the Pharaohs and the Emperors at least.
By the way, Foxconn employs well over a million people who are making tablets and things for those companies you mentioned. So yes, they hire fewer people directly than GM but indirectly many more.
You do understand what they used for adhesive material in the morter and filler for those ancient projects...
It's called the fair tax. And anyone who looks at it thinks it's the best (except CPAs who deal specifically with individuals and IRS agents- because they'd be out of work).
You're grossly overestimating the support for this regressive tax structure.
Edit: oops. I posted this before I saw the official notice that the thread was closed.
Comments
Don't let Republicans fool you with their Job creators-billionaires.
I liked your earlier version of this post. That could have kept us busy until the new topics come out Monday morning. You ruined at least another 5 pages worth of ranting with that retraction.
I've made several jokes on this thread and I don't think any of them landed, so I think I was going for a more reactionary religious comment to get negative feedback if I couldn't get positive feedback. Looking for a negative reaction is bordering on trolling, hence my retraction.
Put your faith in SMALL biz, those are the ones that create MORE jobs.
But we want cheaper pricess.
I've made several jokes on this thread and I don't think any of them landed, so I think I was going for a more reactionary religious comment to get negative feedback if I couldn't get positive feedback. Looking for a negative reaction is bordering on trolling, hence my retraction.
Oh well it would have been entertaining. I might as well go clean up my garage. BTW there is no "J" in Hebrew.
BTW there is no "J" in Paleo-Hebrew.
What are you saying? Esus was an Ew?
What are you saying? Esus was an Ew?
Yod
I must note, Apple COULD potentially have a lot of children locked up somewhere under the sever farm, answering your Siri questions. Could. That's job creation for you there bud.
Add to that the money made for supplying gruel for those children. And the Grubby & Tattered Clothing Company(tm) should do well also.
Hi tech companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook etc. do not create many jobs compared to big corporations of the past. Anybody looking for these kind of companies to put many people to work doesn't really know what they're talking about.
To put this in context, the Economist recently noted that Apple, Amazon, and Google together employ 113,000 people--which is less than 1/3rd as many as a single American success-story from the prior generation, GM, employed in 1980.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/apple...#ixzz1ewHXtXBA
But isn't that the fact that for one, they pay higher? I mean, even if GM and Apple had the same income, Apple is paying over $60,000 a year...right? They usually require advanced degrees, or at least supeior intellectual knowledge.
Even the higher income folks may not improve the town itself. I'm not sure how far away they are from the nearest wealthy area, but I'm sure that won't creat new homes (BTW, I'm responding ot another poster on this).
For example, here in St. Louis, many high income earners in Ladue, MO work in St. Louis city. So I'd imagine this could be the scenario where the job is just in a partiular city but not necessarliy imporiving that residing town in any way.
Add to that the money made for supplying gruel for those children. And the Grubby & Tattered Clothing Company(tm) should do well also.
Hey, you gotta keep the costs down! Gubby & Tattered is too expensive. The cost is too high. How about the Birthday Suit Company(c)?
"From the day we arrive on the planet And blinking , step into the sun There's more to be seen than can ever be......IT'S THE CIRCLE OF LIFEEEEEEEEEE! AND YOU LOSE CONTROOOOOOOOOL!!!!
That's "And it moves us all".
But isn't that the fact that for one, they pay higher? I mean, even if GM and Apple had the same income, Apple is paying over $60,000 a year...right? They usually require advanced degrees, or at least supeior intellectual knowledge.
No, it has nothing to do with the fact that they pay higher. It only means that Apple doesn't need thousands of people to make this datacenter operate, while some inefficient car companies (forced to be inefficient by union rules... just ask Toyota how many employees are truly needed to make a car) need more.
In a town of a reported 3,400 adults, 50 jobs represents a potential employment increase of 1.47%. Every little bit helps, do the math.
Yes, let's do the math.
However, start by realizing that in a city of 3400, not all of them are working. If the total population was 3400, then probably only 1,000 to 1500 are working. If it really was 3400 adults, then probably only 2,000 are working. That makes the percentage higher.
Furthermore, Apple stated that 50 direct employees would be hired, but another 250 in contract services (presumably landscaping, security, janitorial, etc). 300 new jobs in a city where 1,000 to 2,000 people are working is a LOT.
I don't understand what the local expected. If you own a furniture store, a gas station, or some other local business, Apple is not going to hire you, and put you to work in their data center, but wouldn't the people they did hire need furniture, gas, food, etc? Wouldn't that money go back to the local economy?
Obviously, but that's too simplistic for some people.
It's called the fair tax {a high, flat sales tax on everything}. And anyone who looks at it thinks it's the best (except CPAs who deal specifically with individuals and IRS agents- because they'd be out of work).
Actually, I don't think that's fair at all. It means that the people who can least afford it are most heavily burdened as a percentage of their income. To me, a fair tax would be:
- No deductions at all
- First $50,000 of income exempted
- Next $200,000 of income taxed at 10%.
- Remainder taxed at 20% (or whatever it takes to balance things out)
- Capital gains taxed at normal income tax rates, but indexed for inflation
Before going bonkers, realize that very few people earning under $50 K pay any taxes under the current system (some actually get money back even if they don't pay taxes).
That's "And it moves us all".
Oh.
Hey, you gotta keep the costs down! Gubby & Tattered is too expensive. The cost is too high. How about the Birthday Suit Company(c)?
^^^^
Paid shill for the Birthday Suit Company(c).
How many people worked on building the great wall of China or the pyramids? Millions! Things must have been much better back then since there were more jobs... well for the Pharaohs and the Emperors at least.
By the way, Foxconn employs well over a million people who are making tablets and things for those companies you mentioned. So yes, they hire fewer people directly than GM but indirectly many more.
You do understand what they used for adhesive material in the morter and filler for those ancient projects...
[input funny joke that doesn't deal with religion or politics]
Actually, you had already won this thread with "They took'r jobs" pic. The thread is now closed.
It's called the fair tax. And anyone who looks at it thinks it's the best (except CPAs who deal specifically with individuals and IRS agents- because they'd be out of work).
You're grossly overestimating the support for this regressive tax structure.
Edit: oops. I posted this before I saw the official notice that the thread was closed.
My bad. Heheh.
[input funny joke that doesn't deal with religion or politics]
Sex is not the Answer!
Sex is the Question.
...The Answer is Yes!
Sex is not the Answer!
Sex is the Question.
...The Answer is Yes!
Of any kind?