Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer "Rich people don't create jobs"

[ktlight]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKCvf8E7V1g

"Published on 17 May 2012
Via Business Insider: "As the war over income inequality wages on, super-rich Seattle entrepreneur Nick Hanauer has been raising the hackles of his fellow 1-percenters, espousing the contrarian argument that rich people don't actually create jobs. The position is controversial — so much so that TED is refusing to post a talk that Hanauer gave on the subject. National Journal reports today that TED officials decided not to put Hanauer's March 1 speech up online after deeming his remarks "too politically controversial" for the site..."."

[jerry]

Excellent post I will be adding this to my viral files thanks Klight

[WhiteLove]

Thanks, banned because it contained some truth for a change.

[Joe Sustaire]

Yes, very nice to hear some truth clearly stated!

[Bluegreen]

The guy receives a standing O, and gets banned.
Why is it that we always laugh at the truth? (Hicks, this guy, Carlin, etc.)

:confused:

[jagman]

I never have have recieved a job from a poor person....Just saying these are just Far Far left liberal
talking points perpetuated by people like Elizbeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and BO. I'm not knocking all
Liberals but IMO this is just hogwash.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I never have have recieved a job from a poor person....Just saying these are just Far Far left liberal
talking points perpetuated by people like Elizbeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and BO. I'm not knocking all
Liberals but IMO this is just hogwash.

Like he says in the video, business owners only hire employees when they have to in order to increase profits, not just to be nice and give more people jobs so they can share their profits with more people. If I owned a business I would be hiring only the bare minimum number of people to get the work done, and you can count on that.

There is the left/right political spectrum, and then there is an actual science to economics that exists regardless of what political bent you happen to have. I personally don't give lawn clippings about politics and political talking points, but the economic system we have in place now, we should all agree, is not working.

We can come at this from a historical perspective as well, that people who gain power or authority will, as a rule, only seek to do things which will increase the power and authority that they already have. It seems to be human nature, outside of a few rare cases like the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius or George Washington. In the case of the wealthy, they'll find ways to collect more money for themselves, and of course they have an advantage over the poor since they already have lots of money. The people who go from rags to riches are rare cases and in any case contribute nothing to fixing the overall economic situation. If you think the system as it operates today is working, then we have very different ideas of why economic policies exist in the first place.

[Matt P]

The backbone of the economy of the US, and probably every other country in the world, are small businesses, which I think are 50 employees or less. Small businesses account for about 95% of job creation, if memory serves (been awhile since I looked at the numbers). A majority of small business owners are not wealthy so this headline makes sense. And, as Nick pretty much says, it's absurd that the vast majority of tax breaks (i.e. corporate welfare) goes to the largest, wealthiest corporations. It's called theft and it was never about job creation.
One of the ways this inequality is maintained is through the purchase of goods. Rich people pay far less for goods than poor and middle class. For example, consider the purchase of a 100,000 dollar home. A rich person, who can pay for the home all at once, pays the actual cost of 100,000. The poor or middle class family, that must purchase the home with a loan, ends up paying 2 or 3 times the value of the home. Same with cars and other larger goods. As others have said before, we do not have free market capitalism in the US. The entire system is a rigged shell game designed to keep and increase the disparity between the haves and have nots.

Matt

[Carmody]

It's really simple. Wealth that is accumulated and not used, is parasitical, at best.

The equations, the notions of what money does, mathematically, as connected to cultural and social function within humanity..those equations are actually very simple, no matter how one might like to cloud the issue.

Of course, one can keep making up 'what if' statements, to counter what I'm saying and meaning.

In most cases of such, as a counter to my statement, it is a self confusion by the person countering, or a direct attempt to cloud the base issue so that people do not see it for what it is.


Accumulation and leveraging of money by incomplete humans is almost, to a 100% level, a disaster for humanity.


Imagine a herd of 100,000 animals that weigh 200lbs on average. Each requires a certain amount of body fat, in order to be 'mobile' and effective within their given environment. Lets say, 20lbs of fat.

Imagine that 99,999 of them are a bit thin, even in a field where resource is abundant. (basically, that is the state of the world today) Imagine that one of them has 2.5 million pounds of fat on it's body.

That is the rich person in a crowd. Fundamentally, it makes no sense. It cannot exist in the real world, so it hides behind layers of mechanism (finance, economy ,etc) so it is difficult to see (for most people) the very shape and 'reasonable functionality' in the inequality. They can't see it, for there is none in a functional world. The fictionalized layers shape it's 'reason' but it is a falsified reasoning, designed to continue and support oligarchy via a good fit with desires and fears of humans.

Within the idea of a group functioning, accumulation of wealth like that, makes zero sense. It's not about perfect sharing, its about Unreasonable and entirely ineffectual singular levers and controls. Levers that are effective for the one only, over that of the welfare of the many.

Free energy, or over unity energy, has the ability to take all those rich person and oligarchical controls that money exhibits, it has the ability to make absolute mockeries out of those purposely built levers and controls.

And in that moment, all those who currently control the levers and mechanisms, they will go on trial, in the most real sense. It would take time to take shape, but when that happens the world of people begging for a bit of the very abundant fat that exists now, those people who are psychologically tied to the extant system (and can see no other) those will turn on the 'rich and controlling' in a heartbeat.

Those who hide in the backdrop now, those who attempt to limit via control, will be lucky if they even survive in the form of a genetic trace. I'm just reading the writing on the wall, nothing more.

This is part of the fundamental that has a small group of oligarchs that are trying like hell to control and dumb down humanity, to kill it off, at the same time they separate humanity into 'levels' of intelligence, via genetic downturn. (Using the 1984 type controls and ultimately into a 'brave new world' of genetically separated people) That's your Nazi cabal end of things, vs those who are more reasonable.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Thanks for helping get this info to the public.
I can't stand some of the financers of TED. You know who I mean.

Carmody you are really intelligent, I could never have put it all that way.

[Bluegreen]

Evidently this is from 2011
I'm not familiar with this Neil Cavuto from Fox News,
but it is indeed irritating to listen to him shout down an obviously educated individual

madU172f6zI

[Aspen]

Wealth is not trickling down to the poor, it is a continual stream of trickle up, or gushing up! lol

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Wealth is not trickling down to the poor, it is a continual stream of trickle up, or gushing up! lol

I get the feeling that someone like George Bush senior came up with the idea for "trickle down economics" while urinating on one of his sex slaves, and everybody around him thought it sounded reasonable enough.

Am I alone here? :P

[DeDukshyn]

I never have have recieved a job from a poor person....Just saying these are just Far Far left liberal
talking points perpetuated by people like Elizbeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and BO. I'm not knocking all
Liberals but IMO this is just hogwash.

huh? Did you even think about it? Who's going to support the rich when the middle class is gone? no one. Don't let your political views (which a just a route of entry for any "party's" manipulation into one's thoughts, thus choices) obfuscate the obvious truth.

Again Jagman, when the middle class is gone, what is left? Where will the money come from? The printing presses? lol.

[jcocks]

Wealth is not trickling down to the poor, it is a continual stream of trickle up, or gushing up! lol

And when the 1% DO give back, there is *ALWAYS*, and I mean *ALWAYS* an ulterior motive!

I would love to see bill gates give 250 million dollars to homeless shelters in America rather than his usual thinly-veiled eugenics causes such as vaccinations or contraception in North Africa, for instance. Imagine the real difference it could make to peoples' lives.

[jerry]

Wealth is not trickling down to the poor, it is a continual stream of trickle up, or gushing up! lol

I get the feeling that someone like George Bush senior came up with the idea for "trickle down economics" while urinating on one of his sex slaves, and everybody around him thought it sounded reasonable enough.

Am I alone here? :P No way your alone here, that comment is dead on the sad reality of the economic times were all facing.