Rich People Create Jobs!

[mawilson 2,133]

Oh, did Bill Gates and Steve Jobs need rich people to become rich people?

Bill Gates bought QDOS from a guy called Paterson for $50,000, renamed it DOS, and licensed it to IBM for a low per-copy royalty fee.

So he needed at least $50,000 to become rich.

$50,000 in 1980 is $130,000 in 2010 dollars - no small change for a poor person.

[Neonred 3,569]

Oh, did Bill Gates and Steve Jobs need rich people to become rich people?

Either way, once they became rich they created a lot of jobs.

[sly_wolf 199]

Either way, once they became rich they created a lot of jobs.

So it comes back to what I said before. Innovation creates jobs.

[sly_wolf 199]

Another point to add .... innovation is also not required to become rich! Unless someone thinks Madolf was innovative.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Oh, did Bill Gates and Steve Jobs need rich people to become rich people?

Or should I ask if they would be nothing without rich people?

Bill Gates came from a wealthy family, but you are right, he didn't create MS with a lot of capital up front. Same with Apple. Look at Ben & Jerry's, Nike shoes. There are countless examples of success stories of innovative people who turned it into successful businesses. And lets keep in mind that those companies were built upon a lot of blood, sweat in tears of laborers. You can come with the most brilliant of ideas, even throw money at it, but it ain't gonna turn into a product magically by itself. You need labor.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Bill Gates came from a wealthy family, but you are right, he didn't create MS with a lot of capital up front. Same with Apple. Look at Ben & Jerry's, Nike shoes. There are countless examples of success stories of innovative people who turned it into successful businesses. And lets keep in mind that those companies were built upon a lot of blood, sweat in tears of laborers. You can come with the most brilliant of ideas, even throw money at it, but it ain't gonna turn into a product magically by itself. You need labor.

Yes and these peoples who started businesses hired employees and most give benefits. These companies give them a salary that they can then feed and clothe their family. It is a risk to start any business and one who does it has to work a lot of hour to get his business vision out there and grow. At any time this business can fail. There is no labor with no business. No business without start up money. No business without a vision.

The worst part is when they finally do succeed and start making money to put away they become pariahs in the eyes of Socialists.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I work for a poor guy right now as a matter of fact.

[웃 910]

I work for a poor guy right now as a matter of fact.

True statement because you work for yourself!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

True statement because you work for yourself!

Wrong again! So suprising.

I am a w-2 employee of a Construction Company which I have no ownership interest in, drive the poor guy's company vehicle, using the poor guy's gasoline to the poor guy's multiple construction sites to, among other things, ensure compliance with federal and state laws and regulations (which we have to do because all our employees are legal workers and you get in trouble if you do not do that) estimate how many millions the poor guy will have to spend to complete his multiple projects, insure that plans and specifications are being followed, submit change orders, and provide design consultation to the poor guy's clients. I love poor people! I prefer working for them. We all should.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

How ironic that a person whose job would not exist without regulations b!tches about regulations. Biting the hand that feeds you.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

you need a rich person to provide capital for it.

Or the collective wealth of middle income Americans invested in growth funds.

Oh wait. We had that. Guess what happened there?

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I think a good point was made by Dalegg.

The poor and the middle class will not notice if they're tax cuts expire. They are so little and such a tiny $ amount compared to the rich....Yet when you add up the 100s of millions of returns you do get a much larger dollar return to the government than if you just let the cuts expire on the rich (top 2% = 6 million people)...

What we need to do first is let the cuts expire on the lower and middle class. After all, they won't notice it but it will make the biggest impact on the deficits.

Then we need to scale in (maybe a quarter percent at a time) the expiration of tax cuts on the rich...

I disagree that lower income people would not notice. Here's a math exercise for you.

Assume a family of four and an income of 45K per year (too much money for state or Federal help). Find an IRS income tax table and return for the year 1999. Find the same for the tax year 2008. Do a quick scribble through the return, assuming the family cannot itemize but will take the standard deduction. I can assure you there will be a larger tax burden.

While I don't disagree that some families are paying too little taxes, I think it is very out of touch to say they won't notice if their tax burden goes up.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Rebecca Jo

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

you're being a little overly ANALitical about verbiage in a message board post....so how about this:

we 'need' wealthy investor's capital to have 'robust' innovation as well as business & jobs creation.

No I don't think scandal is being "over analytical".

I think instead you and many of the other jaw-waggers need to cut down the rhetoric and think before you speak.

Bill Gates came from a wealthy family, but you are right, he didn't create MS with a lot of capital up front. Same with Apple. Look at Ben & Jerry's, Nike shoes. There are countless examples of success stories of innovative people who turned it into successful businesses. And lets keep in mind that those companies were built upon a lot of blood, sweat in tears of laborers. You can come with the most brilliant of ideas, even throw money at it, but it ain't gonna turn into a product magically by itself. You need labor.

Xavier Roberts, the guy who created Cabbage Patch kids, started his business by maxing out some credit cards.

True story.

[웃 910]

I disagree that lower income people would not notice. Here's a math exercise for you.

Assume a family of four and an income of 45K per year (too much money for state or Federal help). Find an IRS income tax table and return for the year 1999. Find the same for the tax year 2008. Do a quick scribble through the return, assuming the family cannot itemize but will take the standard deduction. I can assure you there will be a larger tax burden.

While I don't disagree that some families are paying too little taxes, I think it is very out of touch to say they won't notice if their tax burden goes up.

So what you are saying is you are a supporter of the Bush tax cuts. And that they should be made permanent.

[SuperDuper! 230]

Innovation is what creates jobs and you dont have to be rich for that!

What are the optimum socio-economic conditions that "innovation" can take place?

Innovation never seems to come out of tropical, Caribbean regions, for example. (Or from the Amish, unless you like the latest in horse and buggy technology.)

Can even crack-head ghetto gangstas be innovators? (oh maybe a hit rap song or two, but we are talking about at least building a better mouse trap or something equally useful for society)

Or are Harvard, Yale dropouts more likely to innovate? Are poor people or rich people more likely to get there?

Seems that it takes money to innovate anything worth innovating.

Only a few glory stories like Steve Jobs or the HP guys founding a Co in their garage ever come along in our lifetime, and even they didn't make it big until the rich guys came along and backed 'em.

Peace.