Après Moi, La Merde

We really don’t care either way about Yet Another Daley occupying the national stage — it’s not like Yet Another Quayle — but we’re getting somewhat annoyed with remarks like this, demonstrated for us by Marc Ambinder:

Choosing Daley, a well-respected Washington-and-Chicago figure, is a further signal that Obama ties the fate of his presidency to the fate of the economy and recognizes that his relationship with Congress will be much less helpful than a better rapport with the nation’s employers and job creators.

It’s long been remarked that reporters don’t know shit about economics, and as a former adept of that Evil Cult, we must include ourself among the Congenitally Clueless.

But as little as we know, we do know this:

Employers don’t create jobs. People who buy shit create jobs.

Ambinder’s remark, shared by any insert-name-here Republican, presumes that “job creation” must be something that Job Creators do when they’re in the mood, and that they’d be more amenable to creating jobs if only they found some spare change in the couch.

But this model of job creation resembles nothing better than a make-work program, which is something we thought only Socialists did, after they were tired of plundering your Crisis Pantry and gay-marrying the family pets.

Happily, our Glorious Capitalist System doesn’t rely upon the kindness of strangers but their greed, creating a virtuous circle that can be succinctly stated in three or four bumper stickers:

If you buy shit, the people who make that shit will hire other people to make more shit.

It’s really that simple, and we fail to understand why journalists and politicians can’t grasp it.

After all, people have been buying their bullshit for generations.


Is this job creator the same dude as the intelligent designer?

American corporations are like the planet Magrathea — they have to wait for the economy to improve before they reinvest the money they’ve been siphoning out of the economy at an escalating rate since the Reagan administration.

Why should they be put at risk just because the backbone of the American economy has broken under the weight of dropping wages, benefit cuts and home equity loss?

Survival of the fittest, baby!

Marginally related: Atlas Juggs decides that WalMart is the antidote to Mooslems

Note the poster at the end – it’s like Nazi agitprop designed by the Onion.

@al2o3cr: That woman needs to have a come to Jesus meeting with her staff necromancer. Bits of skull are peeking out.

To be fair, Noj’, those “people who make that shit” would be the employers, ergo employers will create jobs.

Sadly, many of these jobs will be in big box stores, one of which this Atlas lady has confused us into calling W’Al Mart.

The equation here is too simple; for example, at the place where I work, the downturn in the economy was met by two responses: layoffs, and an increase in the amount of product we are putting on shelves. These little thought experiments are too far removed from the real world to be any good…you have to use data, and history, to make a prediction. When you look at history, and at the data, one thing remains clear: Tax cuts do not create jobs, period. Incentives work, for a time, but in the long run tax cuts create the kind of economy we have now.

The trick is to find someone who can run on a platform of sustainable levels of taxation, and can make that palatable.

I’ll be over here in my bunker while you guys work that out….

@Nabisco: Nope. Employers don’t create jobs. Demand creates jobs.

If you wanna get all nuanced and shit, then yes, you’ll want to make sure the system works as smoothly as possible. I decided early on that I never wanted a business that required employees, because you enter a world of bureaucratic pain the moment you sign your first wage slave.

But this notion that if only plutocrats had more money, they’d hire more people, is utter bullshit. They’ll hire more people if they can make more money.

@nojo: Oh I agree. Trickle down didn’t even survive the giggle test, and is unlikely to be featured prominently in the Reagan Centennial. Speaking of which, when Congress was editing their New Standard Constitution, did they also erase that part of 80s history that saw an increase in the debt?

As for the Cabinet shuffle, who is likely for spokescritter? I’m guessing Oprah…

@Nabisco: Yeah, I’m really bitching about the Laffer Curve. Which, unfortunately, thirty years on, is alive and well. It may not have survived the giggle test, but it still drives policy.

And spokescritter? I never really cared about Gibbs either way. It takes effort to stand out in a long and storied line of assholes.

@Nabisco: p.s. Let me know when you’re next passing through.

@nojo: The only one I’ve ever cared for is Mike McCurry.

@mellbell: You grow up on Ron Ziegler, and you’re spoiled for life.

@nojo: No one’s ever come close. The man was a master.

@mellbell: Hey, I’ll be in your jurisdiction the last two weeks in Jan. Dinner?

Add a Comment
Please log in to post a comment