Quantcast
Opinion

Legitimate, productive businesses are America's golden goose

Comments

Return To Article
  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 6:49 a.m.

    Yes, Capitalism has lifted hundreds of millions of people in China and India out of poverty. In doing so it has also destroyed the American working class and is now quickly eating away at the middle class.

    It is instructive that all of our so called "free trade" treaties have abundant protections for capital and zero protections for labor. Capitalists get protection from capitalism while labor goes down the tubes. A capitalist system cannot survive if people who work can't make a decent living.

    Adam Smith warned us about collusion between employers to suppress the wages of their workers, thereby enhancing their own profits. As in much else, Adam Smith was right.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Aug. 1, 2014 7:08 a.m.

    This editorial states:

    "The recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage shows that anti-business sentiment is growing"

    Unfortunately the rest of the editorial uses Cuba, one of the worlds most extreme communist countries, to illustrate that capitalism is good.

    We need an editorial that seriously addresses the decline of middle class incomes, and the huge pooling if America's financial resources in the top 1%, not a discourse on the evils of Cuban communism!

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:02 a.m.

    The real truth of why business has a bad name is simply that business cheats the people, denying the people their rightful service and performance that business is expected to give. All the smoke and mirrors like this article will not change that but it does seem to perpetuate the false notions of business.

    The purpose of business is to provide the mechanism for the sharing of the talents and benefits of a civilized society. Unfortunately, the greed of men turned that around and propagated the notion that business was part of the right to happiness and had seniority over the rights of people in general. Throughout all of history, the goal of men of power has been to extend their control over others and their labors. Present company NOT excepted.

    Small business is a political scam. While there are many small businesses with only 1 or 2 or a few employees, the small business that politicians are concerned with go all the way to more that 600 employees. Most of the small businesses portrayed in the propaganda come and go at a terrible failure rate.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:06 a.m.

    And Obama and the Democrats are doing everything in their power to kill the golden goose! Get the government boot off the necks of businesses and you will see America prosper, again!

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:39 a.m.

    "The recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage shows that anti-business sentiment is growing."

    Really?

    How can anyone confuse the "recent national dialogue about the 99 percent, income inequality, and a mandatory minimum wage" with anti-business sentiment?

    There is no relationship there.

    That's an old "Conservative" tactic isn't it? . . . Setting up a straw man to knock down.

    A recognition of a growing income disparity is NOT anti-business.

    It's just an example of facing the facts.

    Come on "Conservatives" . . . FACE THE FACTS . . . And quit making stuff up.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:44 a.m.

    There have certainly been a number of problems with capitalism where greedy and corrupt players have done some really bad things, so we definitely need some level of government regulation to keep those things in check.

    But I am amazed at how many anti-capitalists there are out there who hate business and seem to think the answer to every problem is more government. Why do such people put undying faith in government bureaucrats to regulate "fairness" in the market, when government has proven itself time and time again to be less honest and effective than the private sector?

    They will rail on "evil CEOs" all day long and give "evil bureaucrats" a complete pass. Why?

    Most of the problems in the private sector are caused by crony capitalism. Big companies are able to abuse their customers only when competition is scarce. Competition is scarce when the barriers to entry are high. Most of those barriers are caused by government regulations designed to protect entrenched players from better upstarts.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:49 a.m.

    Sorry, Mr. Bell, but your article here is simply not accurate.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:53 a.m.

    "Whenever the vicious portion of the population shall be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and burn churches, ravage and rob provision stores, throw printing presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this government cannot last."
    --Abraham Lincoln

    Those who criticize capitalism are advocating the very anarchy that Lincoln warned about. Let us be clear, those who are against capitalism are against American itself.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:02 a.m.

    The rise in economic disparity correlates directly with the implementation of Reaganomics in the 1980's. Look at the graphics available on the internet, and you can see a steep and continuing rise in income disparity beginning during the Reagan administration.

    Reaganomics greatly reduced taxes for the highest earners. But the highest earners generally are NOT small businessmen.

    The highest earners tend to be heavily invested in large corporations and business. The highest earners control big business.

    By giving more breaks and benefits to high earners and big business, the Reagan administration created a HUGE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE for big business. And that made small businesses less able to compete.

    As a result, small businesses went belly up. They went out of business. And the millions of people employed by them lost their jobs.

    Meanwhile, large businesses controlled by the highest earners, heavily outsourced jobs to other nations, and Americans lost even more jobs.

    Reaganomics is the ENEMY of small business.

    Reaganomics was supposed to provide jobs. It did just the OPPOSITE.

    The solution?

    Reverse Reaganomics.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:25 a.m.

    Actually, the anti-business sentiment is coming from those foul CEOs themselves.

    By killing off the American middle-class they are killing off their golden goose. If the American middle class has purchasing power then those CEOs make more money.

    Just as Ford demonstrated in the past century when he paid his workers sufficient wages so they could buy his cars.

    Killing off American middle class makes sense in the short term for stockholders and greedy get rich quick CEOs. But in the long term it sinks all American businesses.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:53 a.m.

    Who has anything against "legitimate, productive business"? Nobody. The anti-business sentiment in this country is due to the illegitimate, non-productive behavior of robber barons who run finance and insurance industries and the environment-destroying coal and oil businesses. And that sentiment is well taken.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:58 a.m.

    It is disingenuous to put forth the notion that people despise corporations.

    Most thinking people know that corporations are the life blood of this country.

    But, that does not mean that everything they do is good.

    If corporations (and unions) did not lobby or make political contributions, the other problems would get cleaned up.

    Many corporations (and unions) purchase legislation from congress which allows them to do unethical things in order to make more profits.

    They have managed to unlevel the playing field.

    That is generally what causes peoples' unfavorable view of corporations.

  • Commodore West Jordan, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 10:32 a.m.

    Mr. Bell would be wise to watch "Inequality for All". He can find it on Netflix or Amazon.

    If he did watch it he would discover that we Americans are not anti-business, we are pro middle class. Our American economy is dependent on consumption....in fact 80% of our economy is based on consumption. It's really quite elementary to understand that a shrinking middle class will reduce consumption, which then leads to less demand for workers and products. That then puts pressure on businesses to cut hours and staff or raise prices. Which then leads to an even greater shrinking of the middle class.

    We are in a downward spiral here in America. Our middle class is shrinking. Our lower class is increasing. The rich are getting richer. I'd recommend watching Inequality for All to learn about more of the solutions we can implement to make life better for everyone.

  • Commodore West Jordan, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 10:43 a.m.

    @JohnCharitySpring,

    We are not criticizing all capitalism, merely unregulated/deregulated/unfair capitalism. Markets work under the rules that governments make for them. Governments need to make rules in the market place or you would have corporations suppressing workers and consumers in a variety of ways.

    Do you honestly think McDonald's would pay their workers minimum wage if they were not regulated to do so? You and I both know they and other corporations would use the glut of labor to the disadvantage of labor by stating: "here is $4 an hour, take it or leave it...we can find someone else more desperate than you."

    Or do you really think corporations wouldn't use cheaper ( and often toxic) materials and processes if they were not regulated? We find Chinese products all the time that end up all over the word made with cadmium, a toxic metal.

    Governments set a majority of the rules of the markets that all play in. These rules - or lack thereof - have allowed others to efficiently drive a huge majority of wealth to the top leaving crumbs for the true creators of value - laborers.

    Innovators & risk-takers deserve a big piece of the pie, just not 80%+.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 11:34 a.m.

    JoeBlow: "It is disingenuous to put forth the notion that people despise corporations."

    Exhibit 1: Irony Guy - "...robber barons who run finance and insurance industries and the environment-destroying coal and oil businesses.."

    Exhibit 2: Ultra Bob - "...business cheats the people, denying the people their rightful service and performance that business is expected to give."

    Sounds like some people do despise corporations.

    Commodore: "Innovators & risk-takers deserve a big piece of the pie, just not 80%+"

    Yet liberals are fine with government (which does none of the work or takes any of the risks) getting a bigger piece of the pie than do the innovators.

  • mcclark Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 12:44 p.m.

    As a small business owner (18 employees) I keep looking for this boot on my neck from the federal government I keep hearing about. I would love for single payer health care, I could offer the same health care as IBM. And my competitors would be paying the same as I am. But the Republicans keep telling me they are trying to help me, when it is the likes of the Koch Bros they actually help. Orin Hatch thinks there is nothing wrong with buying companies in other countries, and then claiming they are owned by the company they just bought so they can avoid paying taxes. All the while enjoying the benefits of having their company based in the USA.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Aug. 1, 2014 1:28 p.m.

    "Sounds like some people do despise corporations."

    No doubt that some do have problems with the way some corps do business.

    But then you go on to paint with the broad brush of

    "Yet liberals are fine with government (which does none of the work or takes any of the risks) getting a bigger piece of the pie than do the innovators."

    I would venture to say that most "liberals" like corporations in general but feel that at times they go too far in their quest for profits.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 1:51 p.m.

    Could it be that the golden goose that just now died was the last of the poor, weak, nations of central and south America that could be oppressed by American businessmen. And now that the American businessmen are aiming their economic and political weapons at Europe and Asia and finding resistance, have come to the realization that America is dying, so grab the money and run.


    The article states: " Next time you attend a symphony or play, notice who sponsors the performance. Who supports our charities? Most major donors are businesses or businesspeople". This is probably a lie. The truth is that the ordinary people, tax payers, are the ones taken by these

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 1:55 p.m.

    Joe Capitalist.

    Who owns business?

    Who creates the opportunity for a business operation?

    Who creates the need for a business operation?

    Who provides the customers for a business operation?

    Who provides the workers for a business operation?

    Who specifies the quantity, quality and the manner of creation of the product?

    Who provides the infrastructure needed for the business operation?

    Who provides the protection from other businesses for the business operation?

    Who provides the rules and regulations for the business operation?

    Who pays for all the costs, wages, taxes and profits?

    The answer to all of the above is Society and its agent called government.

    ---

    Who provides the money to build, run and create the product?

    Who gets all the profit?

    The answer to these questions is the Investor, who loans the business operation some of his surplus money.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 1:56 p.m.

    @JoeCapitalist2
    If you want to compare the efficiency of the private sector vs the public that is a conversation. However, why do you implicitly trust business, but not the government? For total capitalists like yourself, I don't understand why the government is the boogey man, but large companies can do no wrong. Fundamentally, there isn't a huge difference between a massive corporation, and the government. You can find virtually everything the government does in the private sector, so why is it that when one side runs things, they are untrustworthy snakes, but the other are angels, seems to me that we should be equally worried about both sides of the equation.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:03 p.m.

    Noodlekaboodle:

    I don't implicitly trust business. I never said I did. Many of them are bad. I don't have to support any of them since I can choose to spend my dollars wherever I want. None of them have the power to force me to buy their products or use their services. If any of them mistreat me as a customer, I will direct my business to a competitior or some other venture entirely.

    Government on the other hand has the power to tax me, to force me to buy a product (Obamacare), and put me in jail if I refuse to do those things. That is why I am more scared of government abuses that private sector ones.

    JoeBlow:

    I might have painted liberals with a broad brush, but I have yet to meet one who thinks that the current 50% total taxes that many high earners pay, is too much. They are constantly pushing for even higher taxes.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 1, 2014 5:32 p.m.

    There's a simple solution to see whether we need a free market system. Just have business owners close up their businesses. Let those who tell us that labor unions are the answer hire all the fired people. Let those who berate the investors invest their own money. Let's see how fast the IRS would have to close it's doors. Let's see how long Air Force One could shuttle Obama between golf courses after every business shut its doors.

    Business does not need more regulations. We are being regulated out of business. Who regulates the regulators? Who protects the U.S. Businesses from cheap (i.e. unregulated) foreign competition? Who decides what regulations we need? Does Al Gore? He told us that New York would be underwater by now if we didn't pass his carbon tax. Was he right? How many of the elite know any more than Al Gore about cause and effect? The elite are still flying their private jets all over the world. Are they exempt?

    Almost all regulation is nothing more than a grab for power.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 11:10 p.m.

    I am not anti business but I can not stand when republicans say that businesses are job creators. I hope business owners do not think they are job creators and realize paying customers are job creators.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Aug. 2, 2014 5:59 a.m.

    "I have yet to meet one who thinks that the current 50% total taxes that many high earners pay, is too much"

    Certainly you could cherry pick and find some "high earners" "paying 50% total taxes".

    But they would be the exception.

    The average federal tax bill for "high earners" is about 23%.

    Many pay far far less than that (Romney for example).

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 8:57 a.m.

    "Suppose there are two fruit stands selling peaches and only 100 cars will drive by each day. A buyer who purchases peaches at stand A is a sale lost to stand B. A and B are in a win-lose game in this example. But that’s not how it really works."

    ======

    That IS not how it works.

    If store A and B tried to improve their product, service, and lower their price --THAT would be wonderful.

    But in Reality,
    If store B can't win on merits alone, rather than improve itself, it will lie, cheat, and steal, and trash talk, SUE, run false ads, sabotage, and do everything it can to KILL the competition.
    And THAT is why I'm so down on "Business".

    As for "Capitalism" and China...
    What Mr. Bell does not say -- is that Capitalism in Chain is NOT what "created" anything new...
    in reality what happened was AMERICA's Middle class simply "redistributed", off-shored, and out-sourced to Communist Red China, by the very businesses he is praising.

    Sold Out!, in other words.

  • Dan2009 Murray, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 9:47 a.m.

    No doubt we need businesses. But we don't need businesses who prey on their own employees, something that has happened to me. It's like middle managers these days feel they have handed you a winning lottery ticket just because they condescended to hire you, because the economy is bad. (Things get a lot different real quick when the economy is good.)

    Arrogant middle managers will fire you for flimsy or even non-existent reasons if they feel like it these days, and co-workers won't hesitate to back-stab a fellow employee who does nothing but work, keep their head down, and mind their own business.

    Congratulations, Dave. You, Jennifer, and Trisha were most persistent in your determination to get me fired, with or without cause, as Utah law allows. Since no cause was ever found, you fired me anyway - on New Year's Eve day, no less. Nice touch.

    Oh, and I love how you're now telling all prospective employers that you've never heard of me, making it all but impossible for me to get another job, even after all this time. Well-played. You certainly accomplished your aim.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 1:07 p.m.

    Mike Richards.

    All regulations are an exercise of power. When the government creates the regulations it is assumed to be the power of the people telling business the how, when and what of business operations. It is the people's right and authority to do so.

    Government regulation and control is the main purpose of government. That is so even when unscrupulous business men use the power of government to do selfish actions. The segregating of the task is intended to make such miscarriages of government as difficult as possible.

    The denial of the power and authority for the government to do its job, is the act and agenda of criminal people who want the freedom to cheat.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 2:38 p.m.

    "If someone makes money, then someone else has to lose money. "

    Most profit comes from hired labor not being paid fully for the value it adds. This is the Marxian perspective and it is important.

    Now one can argue that the other benefits of capitalism outweigh the cheating of labor, but labor's position in capitalism explains the problems we have with it. Marx needs to be read.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 8:45 p.m.

    to JCS...

    The Licoln quote was nice but you had to add your 2 cents about Antt-capitalsm = Anti-American which I'm betting that was a major theme on Hannity this week?

    A major component of American Capitalism is the Federal Reserve. So, as Jefferrson said...

    "The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered."

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 8:49 p.m.

    to Mike Richards

    Maybe the House GOP can end their lawsuit of Obama, do their Constitutional duty (for a change), & come up with a budget that includes reducing the Corporate Tax Rate???

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 9:31 p.m.

    re: Noodlekaboodle this afternoon

    Wouldn't using whatever twisted reasoning that makes Corporations people apply equally to Gov't bureaucracies?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 4, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    I totally agree with this letter.... Legitimate, productive businesses are America's golden goose...

    There are many people who want to kill the golden goose?

    Then what???

    Marxism? Communism? North Korea? Everybody worshiping the Government and barely subsisting on the black market or the Government Dole, and whatever aid they can squeeze or beg from the remaining Capitalist countries???

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 4, 2014 2:03 p.m.

    @marxist.... "If someone makes money, then someone else has to lose money"....

    Not true. Google "Is economy a zero-sum game"...

    Economics is NOT a zero-sum game.

    The TRUTH is... value CAN be created in a growing economy.

    Do you actually think every dollar in the US Economy today existed in someone else's hands before the United States was even formed??? That no value has ever been created? That in business for someone to win, someone has to loose?

    Who is the "winner", and who is the "looser" when you buy something? I think you are both winners. You BOTH got something you wanted more than what you gave for it!

    If a person discovers gold, or oil, catches a fish, or builds a house, or a skyscraper, or a restaurant, or a gym, writes a song, or a book... they have ADDED value to the economy. And that economy grows a little for EVERYBODY.

    If you seriously think economics is a zero-sum science... You need to go back to school.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 4, 2014 3:19 p.m.

    @Noodlekaboodle,

    Re: "Fundamentally, there isn't a huge difference between a massive corporation, and the government"...

    Oh really...
    - Can a corporation pass laws?
    - Can a corporation regulate or control our behavior (by passing laws that govern us)?
    - Can a business tax us?
    - Can a business take away your children?
    - Can a business put you in jail for not doing what they want?
    - Can a business force your child to go to war?

    I think they are fundamentally different....

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 4, 2014 3:30 p.m.

    Congress owes nothing to the Executive Branch. Obama can whine and wail all he wants, but his job is to execute the laws passed by Congress. The PEOPLE elected the House. The House is Republican. The PEOPLE wanted a Conservative approach to taxes and to regulations. Obama disagrees. Reid disagrees. Both of them want the House to slink away so that Obama can dictate from the Oval Office all laws that he deems necessary. Reid refuses to even consider the bills passed by the House. He won't let the Senate vote on a Senate version of those bills.

    We have separate branches of government for a purpose. The House represents the People, not the President. The Senate represents the States, not the President. The President is the CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the United States. His job is to see that the laws passed by the People's Representatives and the laws passed by the State's Representatives are executed according to law.

    If he were to do that, business would flourish and America would recover. His tantrums are destroying our economy. He is failing in his sworn duties.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 4, 2014 9:25 p.m.

    RE: 2bits @marxist.... "If someone makes money, then someone else has to lose money"....

    I was quoting the writer of the article.

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 4:52 a.m.

    Here is a simple fact, A business, any business big or small is in business for just one reason and that is to make its owners money. A business is not created for any other reason.
    It seems like most liberal posts here resent money makers. Could you please tell me how your leaders such as the Clinton's, the Gores, the Obamas and the Harry Reid's all came into office fairly poor and left office fairly rich. Your heroes are making money and making lots of it and they are not sharing with their voters.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 5, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    KJB1,

    Your post was offensive. You have decided that you can speak for me. Please refrain from assuming that you can speak for me in the future.

    I believe in the Constitution, as written, not as some wished that it were written. The PEOPLE are represented by the House. The States are represented by the Senate. The President has no legislative authority. Congress is not required to listen to anything proposed by the Executive Branch. Even if the President had won every electoral vote, he still could not legislate nor could he "bully" Congress or the Court.

    Congress has limited authority to regulate business. Interstate Commerce is an exception. Congress can regulate Interstate Commerce so that all States are treated fairly. Read Article 1, Section 8 where the authorized duties of Congress are enumerated.

    Unfair regulation of business has driven businesses off-shore. Lower corporate taxes in other nations have created a hostile tax environment for businesses in America. No family would buy milk at $10 a gallon when the family could buy it for $3. Corporations go where they are welcomed.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Aug. 5, 2014 8:11 a.m.

    So I just took the time to read all the posts, and while there is and always will be differences of opinion on what is a fair tax, and what is a necessary regulation it struck me that there is one idea that pollutes this discussion. I'm sure this will be dis-credited because it comes from me (a progressive), but here it is.

    It is the assumption by the right that the "left" sees government as a substitute for business. The article itself makes this abundantly clear when in the beginning he says the USSR substituted government for free enterprise and it didn't work. Who cares unless you are implying that the left in America see Government as a prime provider of services and goods.

    This assumption is absolutely false. The "left" sees government as an arbitrator, and a catalyst, when it comes to commerce but not as a primary provider.

    The liberals on this post spend half of their time defending their commitment to regulated capitalism and denying an attitude that doesn't exist in the first place.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 9:20 a.m.

    Re: "I can not stand when republicans say that businesses are job creators" (shaun)...

    You can't stand it... Yet it's true. Businesses DO create jobs.

    ==============

    You say customers create jobs. They are part of the process, but let's do a mental experiment.

    Pretend you want to create some jobs. Think... How can I create jobs?... You have 2 ideas. 1) You could open a taco stand on your street corner and hire somebody to run it. 2) You stand on the corner with money in hand, or go to another corner and buy a taco.

    Who "Created" job?

    You buying a taco? Or you opening a store and hiring somebody to run it???

    The business created a job. Customers are needed, but did the customer create a job? Or the business?

    =============

    Businesses also create new customers. When your neighbors see the taco stand on the corner, they may also decide to buy some tacos. And Walla... the business created both Jobs AND Customers.

    Businesses need customers. But customers don't factually "create" jobs.

    ==========

    If customers create jobs... Why does Obama blame business for NOT creating jobs??? He should blame customers... right?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 10:58 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    Your post was offensive. You have decided that you can speak for me. Please refrain from assuming that you can speak for me in the future.

    =====

    Holy Cow Mike,
    Do you every apply what you say to yourself?

    BTW --
    If The President is the Executive Branch,
    Then ALL problems belong to Congress.

    MOST Americans realize this.

    Obama 54% approval rate for his job,
    Congress is at what?, 9%

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    Aug. 5, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    "Yet liberals are fine with government (which does none of the work or takes any of the risks) getting a bigger piece of the pie than do the innovators."

    And why not?

    "The government is us; we are the government, you and I." - Theodore Roosevelt

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Aug. 5, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    2bits..I'm sorry but that's just a dumb game you're playing. You open a taco stand and nobody comes and buys your tacos did you create a job (work that creates profits and income)? We could do this all day if the DN allowed it.

    Here's the rest of your game. "If customers create jobs... Why does Obama blame business for NOT creating jobs??? He should blame customers... right?"

    He does..he has claimed all along this was a demand driven recession and that unless we put money in the hands of consumers no jobs were going to be created. It's the whole theory behind the stimulus and government work.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 6, 2014 10:59 a.m.

    Liberal,

    If you have something to contribute, why not use your own words and your own ideas? Picking apart the ideas of others without contributing is something that happens in kindergarden. Somewhere in early junior high school, most people learn to stand on their own feet and they learn to present their own ideas.

    You know what the Constitution says, but it appears that you will only stomp on the Constitution indirectly. Why not tell us why your version of the "perfect" Constitution is better? Why not "own" the content of your posts? Why not practice what you preach?

    Anyone who actually owns a business could easily school you on why the government is impeding business growth and impeding the hiring of people. Maybe you actually own a business that produces a product for Americans. If you do, then tell us how you made it work, notwithstanding the taxes and regulations that have driven most businesses offshore. If you don't own a business, then your comments are fluff. Those of us who own businesses can see through "fluff".

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 6, 2014 5:18 p.m.

    GaryO
    "Income Inequality Is Not Rising Globally. It's Falling." This headline from the left wing NYTimes negates your comment.