The Lie About Job Creation Republicans Don’t Want You to Think About

jobsI wrote a couple of weeks ago about the con of Trickle Down Economics.  Because that’s what I feel it is, a giant con.  It was concocted by those with money and power to manipulate a society into believing salvation lies by giving them more while everyone else gets their scraps.

What I believe in is Demand Side Economics.  Because you know what Trickle Down Economics fails to address directly?  The real driving force behind our economydemand.

Republicans like to call the wealthy “job creators.”  It’s a great way to subjectively tell you that anyone of a certain income bracket creates jobs.  They’re not rich.  They’re not wealthy.  They’re job creators!

In fact I read an article a while back where Republican strategists were telling conservative politicians they needed to avoid the terms “wealthy” or “rich” and find ways to inject the word “jobs” into more speeches.

Notice I didn’t say they told them to pass jobs bills.  They simply said they need to say the word “jobs” more often.  A good psychological tactic to manipulate the public by using a trigger word in “jobs” while doing nothing to actually create them.

Republicans like to champion their ideology on the premise that the rich and powerful need more so they can then “spread” that wealth down to us by the way of more jobs, better pay and increased benefits.

This, as we know, is a bunch of crap.

Almost all credible evidence of the last 30 years shows the gap between the wealthy and the middle class continues to widen, and at a record pace.  This past decade, as the wealthy enjoyed some of the lowest taxes in history, the gap between the top 1% and the rest of us widened at a faster pace than at any other time in our history.  I don’t have to remind you this all happened as our country fell into an economic hole not seen since the Great Depression.

But I thought Republicans said the more the top 1% get the better off we’ll all be?  That’s what the con tells us, right?  So, what’s the deal?

Well as with any con, the promised payoff is just a myth and the person being conned is left standing high and dry.

Trickle Down Economics fails because it doesn’t address the real true force behind our economy, consumer demand.

Sure the theory states that with lower taxes for the wealthy they’ll create more, better paying, jobs.  Those new jobs will then result in more personal income for the middle class to spend.

The reality though is that very little trickles down.  It’s a fairy tale told to you by the people who stand to benefit the most if you buy into it.

So since Trickle Down Economics has been a total failure for 99% of the country, we need to usher in a new era of economics.  Demand Side Economics.  It’s time we pass it back up to the top 1% since they’ve shown unequivocally they have no intention of trickling anything down to the rest of us.

We shop at small businesses, they don’t.

We buy millions of products every day, they don’t.

We keep this free market economy rolling, they don’t.

We invest in our country, they don’t.

We are the job creators, not them.

The money they possess comes from our pockets.  Without the factory worker, the server, the cashier, or the janitor they don’t enjoy the wealth Americans were conned into giving them.  Yes, they spend a lot of money, but they make up 1% of the entire population.  There are a lot more of us than there are of them.  Sure they make investments, but many of them are in offshore bank accounts or spent on expensive international homes.

They gained power because millions of Americans were naive enough to buy into the idea these individuals, who spend millions lobbying politicians to pay as little in taxes as possible, want to give us some of their loose change.

We witnessed jobs get outsourced, eliminated and consolidated.  We saw wages remain stagnate, benefits shrink and pensions all but vanish—while buying into the idea that despite these realities, we need to give them more.

It is genius though, isn’t it?  No matter how bad things get they can always say, “How will raising our taxes help?  We need more revenue to build jobs!”

And that’s exactly what they do.

But guess what?  When times are good, and you mention a possible tax increase, they have a near flawless counter to that as well, “Why would you raise our taxes, do you want to send us back into recession?”

Do you see just how good of a hoax this is?

But it’s all a con.

They’re nobodies without us.  If we don’t buy what they’re selling how will they continue to build this wealth they enjoy?  They may invest in businesses and have a few ideas, but without us, they have nobody to work at these places.

It’s time we end this nonsense.  Three decades, 5 recessions and one near economic depression later—it’s safe to say Trickle Down Economics has been a failure.

At least for 99% of Americans.

It’s time people realize we are the real job creators in this country, not them.  It’s time we stopped giving massive tax incentives to these top 1% of Americans while pinning the burden of reducing our deficits solely on the shoulders of the middle class and our poor.

Yes, we need to reduce spending, but it makes absolutely no sense to allow a trillion dollars in tax revenue to be given back to millionaires every year while we pluck that trillion in spending cuts from public jobs and programs that help build and strengthen our middle class.

What it comes down to is if we agree deficits need to be reduced, and most of us do, the money has to come from somewhere.  What seems more rational?:

A) Reducing our deficits by cutting programs that benefit the real driving force behind our economy.


B) Slightly higher taxes on those who make millions, so that we don’t have to gut programs, or eliminate public jobs, that middle class Americans desperately need.

Calling a fish a duck doesn’t make it anymore a duck than calling a wealthy person a job creator makes them create a single job.  Republicans know this, but it is bad politics to actually admit it.

The middle class needs to stand up and end this joke of an economic policy.  It’s time we demand a stop to this myth of Trickle Down Economics.

But hey, the wealthy Americans need not worry, once 99% of Americans have more money in our pocket we’ll be sure to do what you didn’t do—spread it around.  We’ll take the lead and fulfill our roles as consumers (the real job creators) and we’ll allow you to go back to what you really are—just the richest 1%.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Virtualphil

    Give the top 5% more money and they will move that money into shelters ( mostly offshore)… it will rarely find it’s way back into the economy. Create jobs? Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Yeah right… You want to see where the money moves? Look to the middle class – hey, living from paycheck to paycheck, in one hand and out the other. Very little accumulation… this is where the economy has to have an impact if the global economy is to survive! Take a look around, look at the Eurozone… just sayin’

  • I’ve been saying this for ages. I keep getting told that the rich need their tax breaks (if not more tax breaks) to create jobs. I keep trying to explain that a tax break will NOT create more jobs. I own a small business, but nowhere near the 1%. However it still serves as an example. If I get a tax break, I would not just automatically use that money to hire more people/create more jobs, that I don’t actually need. And mcdonalds or any corporation won’t either. Just like if I win the lottery, it won’t cause me to create more jobs. Me (or anyone) hiring depends on the need to hire more people to do a job/run a business. Need to do so comes from demand. If sales are higher you need to hire more people/create jobs. Now if the poor and middle class have more money, they spend it. At my business, at mcdonalds, everywhere. Them spending the money there creates more demand, which means mcdonalds (and me, and everyone) NEED to hire more people to meet those needs. Then when there are more people hired to meet those needs, all those people hired, now have more money, and then they spend it, at my business, at BK, at the clothes and furniture stores, and elsewhere, which creates even more demand at even more places, which creates more jobs to meet that demand, which……..

    • Sue

      I get your point, Larry Berry, but so many of the things we buy are produced in other countries, not America. So, if demand goes up for clothes, or rugs, or food, etc. and these things are made in China, or India, or Indonesia, etc., that will require more people to be hired in THOSE countries, not in America. Because of this, the so-called job creators are getting the things they sell from foreign countries, and all the while they’re getting tax breaks for doing it. We need more American made products, and I am totally fine with giving tax incentives for American employers who employ American people to make products in America. But that just isn’t happening because the job creators make much more profit having the items produced by foreign workers, who are so underpaid, which means more profits for the job creators, which is exactly what they want. So higher demand isn’t going to solve this whole mess we’re in, it really starts before that! We need to find a way to make goods in America, that will still produce profit for the job creators, and produce fair wages and decent benefits for the American workers. By fair wages, I am not talking about minimum wage. No one can even come close to supporting their family on $7.50 per hour. How do we do this? I really don’t know, but it begins with working people, and the business people who need to hire the workers, and our politicians sitting down and having some honest conversations of how laws need to be changed, and how our politicians need to start working together, and just how serious this whole situation really is. I have 3 sons, and I truly fear for what their lives will be like in 20-30 years, if some things don’t change soon.

    • Alexis Betancourt

      What jobs have the rich given us orC ongress created jobs? None. zero, nada. Why won’t Congress pass the jobs proposed by Obama? Obama has introduced jobs and they have not passed any of his Job Bills, they have not passed jobs and training for our Veterans. They have not helped and they won’t.

    • Darius Dpas Deepazz Smith

      Thank you Larry for your hard work and effort in this nation. May God bless you and yours.

  • pk

    Greed is greed. Doesn’t matter who gets the money but who controls it.

  • Eric Jones

    The only way I could see a “Trickle-Down” system working is if we did it for small businesses who would like to expand. The huge corporations already have the money to expand so giving them extra tax breaks just adds to their profits which are already at record highs. If any tax cut on the business end would help the economy, it is with the small business owners who want to open up a second business for example.

  • All this talk about something that has already happened, is OVER. We’re done for. We’ll look like the Hebrews of Pharoah in another six months. Don’t be surprised if it takes another 2,000 years to make it right either. Get your tubes tied and stop them from turning our children to the same life. Stop them. Do not give them children. Do not give them labor. Do NOT give them your worship as you have for so many years. Until you stop, they don’t have to. It’s their ball and let’s hope they take it home to play with, alone, where they belong.

  • It was not Socialism that made this country great. It was a balance found, after the Great Depression, between corporate wants and workers needs. Unions and Government Regulations kept greed in check to allow the middle class to flourish and prosper from the fruits of their honest work. Trickle Down Economics destroyed – what the country now needs most!

  • Hmmm, I certainly think it’s a good idea to celebrate the demand that the bulk of us provide for rich folks, which is equally important if not more so to anybody , but that doesn’t necessarily justify throwing out 2000 years of economic realities as described by Adam Smith. Perhaps the most relevant of these ideas, when describing supply side economics, is not whether supply is more important than demand (like trying to pick whether the man or the woman is more integral to birthing children; both are necessary and so picking between the two is pointless) but trying to understand where public policy can influence the amount of trade that’s happening at all. I’d encourage you to read The Wealth of Nations, which essentially discredited the notion that governments can “create” more wealth by picking winners or losers in the market (ie taxes). Certainly it’s possible to redistribute the wealth, but that’s a different and antithetical policy proposal than growing the economy. Those of us who champion the “job-creators” are simply trying to stay positive (let’s celebrate everyone’s contribution!) and advocate the counter-intuitive notion that leaving people alone rather than trying to force them to trade with each other is better for everyone in the long run. And I have history on my side.

    • Citisix

      “And I have history on my side.”
      No you don’t.

    • Brian

      You’re either a liar or just woefully misinformed and willfully ignorant.

    • Gman

      You are spot on. Let the markets determine supply and demand and keep the govt out of it.

  • disqus_pRZeinN2iW

    I’ve never heard this put more succinctly. Beautiful!

  • sfwmson

    I’d like to see you write about the other con they sold us; “investing deferred compensation, invest in mutual finds, invest in money market companies. You can’t live on what your SS will bring you. Invest as you work and with even $50 a month, you’ll end up with 365,000 bucks.” Yeah, until wall street greed wiped out those accounts. My wife and I lost nearly 150,000. That was going to help us retire early. Fuck them.

  • I am not too sure but whether it is too late/ The Reagan Admin rewrote many of the rules and regulations which allowed 5 or 6 rich dudes and or conglomerates to control the media, as well a killing most of the regulations that controlled banks and Insurance .. Then Newt got Clinton to sign several bills that made things worse. And in the end the Banks Wall Street, and the right spent 40 years picking the poor and middle class pockets effectively. Most of the regulations, the media, and Wall Street are against any changes.

  • Diana Bauer

    Business Economics 101: You have to spend money to make money. If people have money in their pockets, they will buy goods and services, thus creating demand. If there is more demand for goods and services, then more people will have to be hired to produce/provide those goods and services. If more people are hired, then there will be more people with money in their pockets to spend on…..goods and services. Also, with more people being hired and put to work, there will be more payroll taxes paid to fund government services, ie., building and maintaining roads and bridges, emergency (police/fire) services, teachers, etc. This isn’t a difficult concept to grasp, unless you’re a Republican bent on selling the “trickle down” theory.

  • Joey

    consumers create the need for the job, the rich exploit that opportunity.

    so the rich push for no contraception, no abortion, no homosexuality, and promote human breeding to create more consumers and competition for the same jobs.

  • sk8sonh2o

    The makers vs takers argument is a war on consumers

  • Brian

    What do you mean “slightly” raise taxes on the rich? Nibbling around the edges won’t be enough. We need to repeal the REAGAN Tax Cuts, just for starters. That will at least partially increase the revenue needed. We also need to return to Tariff policies that protect domestic jobs. More workers means more taxes plus reduced demand on government assistance. We need strong Labor Union membership to protect high wages for those working.

    We could also improve this nation by implementing “free” education from K – PhD level in addition to Universal Healthcare for all.

    While we’re at it, end subsidies to Corporations, particularly those involved in fossil fuels and instead NATIONALIZE all energy production and distribution.

    And last but certainly not least, regulate the financial sector while reclaiming the trillions which were stolen and jail those responsible for the last meltdown.

    Oh, one more thing…draw down the unconstitutional standing military which costs tax payers trillions per year and is a threat to our foreign policy and domestic safety.

    • Nora-Adrienne Deret

      You mean free like City Colleges in NYC used to be? My parents didn’t pay to go to a City College. By the time I attended I was paying a couple of hundred dollars per course.. By the time my kids started City College was about 5g’s a year… I put 4 kids through college on a non college education pay scale. I never finished because I had no support at home. (not part of the actual issue)

    • Gman

      Yeah…tax the rich and watch them take their businesses else. France is trying that and all you get is the rich moving out of the country.

      Who pays for this free education K-PHD? and Universal Healthcare?

      The middle class….Stop dreaming.

      • Brian

        Funny thing happened after the Great Depression. Taxes went as high as 92% on income after $3 million and guess what happened? The wealthy… STAYED in the USA.

        Of course, Tariff penalties helped that as well as heavy regulations on the financial sector, all done away by Conservatives.

        So, who pays for free education in places like Norway? EVERYBODY, because educating the population is an investment, not an expense. But Conservatives rather like having a dumb poverty ridden nation…far easier to manipulate that way.

  • Gander

    It’s not just about taxes (though they are an important part), but wages and benefits. As corporations and wealthy business owners (large and small) sock it away, they’re doing it by squeezing the dreams , and the life out of the working poor. Few greater examples exist in America today than in the food service industry. Federal sub-minimum tipped wages were pinned to half of minimum wage until “Nine, nine, nine!” Herman Caine took over the NRA. No, not the gun nuts. The other NRA, the one that does more damage to more lives in this country. The National Restaurant Association. Look it up. The NRA went along with a federal minimum wage increase only if they could freeze the sub-minimum tipped wages at $2.13/hour. How much better did your profit margin suddenly become? And why do you think you’ve suddenly seen this boom in restaurants all over the place? And why do you think you’ve suddenly seen this boom in food service employees needing government assistance? The NRA created millions of new jobs, and thousands of more rich people, and millions of more WORKING poor.

  • Curt Welch

    The “Job Creators” are actually right. Trickle down economics is a great idea and should be implemented immediately to create constantly supply side stimulation. It needs to be implemented as a Basic Income Guarantee for the people funded by taxes on the “Job Creators”.

    • melloe

      I think you were being tongue in cheek, and if you meant by taxing the crap out of the rich, I agree.

      • Curt Welch

        Yes, It’s tongue in cheek. Sort of. And actually, reading it now, I see I wrote “supply side” when I meant to write “demand side” which might have mislead people to my message. (I’ve edited it now).

        I think we need to FORCE the money to trickle down by taxing the rich and taxing the corporations and distributing the money to the people as a Basic Income Guarantee. We need to do what the “Job Creators” said they would do, but have failed to deliver on.

  • Nora-Adrienne Deret

    All the jobs in the support industry were lost by giving incentives to companies to outsource… So they laid off a could of hundred thousand workers who spoke English and pay pennies on the dollar for people to who it’s barely a second language. We need to have those incentives removed and try to find a way to bring those jobs back within our borders.

  • Gman

    This author is a total nut job

  • Ron Carr

    A long time ago in an America that is now far, far away, our economy was focused on producing top shelf products for Americans with import/export being secondary. We have now shifted to a “global economy.” What the American people can no longer afford is now exported to other countries for sale. Since these so called “job creators” are still producing and selling the same or more products at a cheaper price (since they have exported our jobs, too) they have no hole in their profit margin. They could give a hoot less about Americans. We are stuck buying the poor quality imported items produced in sweat shops around the world.

  • MarvinM

    I take it this is one of your fictitious posts, like the Paula Deen post. Either that or you have a woefully inadequate understanding of economics. Some points to consider: 1. If you don’t have money, it’s not because someone else does. 2. If someone else doesn’t have money, it doesn’t mean you’ll get it. 3. The government can’t do anything efficiently enough to not screw it up. While redistribution might sound like a grand idea to you, the primary problem with its implementation is the loss effect. If I hand you a dollar…it’s a dollar. If the government takes a dollar from me, they hand you 70 cents and the other 30 gets lost in the overhead. 4. The “rich” tend to be rich for a reason. 5. The poor tend to be poor for a reason. 6. The only way to make everyone equal is to make everyone equally poor and miserable. 7. Robin Hood was a thief. 8. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor creates equally temporary changes. The “rich” will return to being rich, and the poor will return to being poor.

    • Curt Welch

      Your social views are that of a Child Marvin. Your arguments are very dangerous for society, and need to be corrected immediately.

      “1 if you don’t have money, it’s not because someone else does”.

      When a business losses customers to it’s competition, it is VERY MUCH, because someone else got the money. When a person is laid off, while the CEO gets a raise, it’s very much becuase someone else has the money. When you make a trade, with someone who is a better negotiator than you, you get less than your “fair share” of money, exactly becuase the person you trade with stole your product without giving you the money he owed you. There is a fixed money supply in the economy, and when on person gets a dollar, then by simple math, it means someone else loses money. That’s how the economy works.

      When inequality in society raises, as it has been for over 30 years in the US, it means some people are getting the money, and others, are losing it.

      “2. If someone else doesn’t have money, it doesn’t mean you’ll get it.”

      Well, that’s valid.

      ” 3. The government can’t do anything efficiently enough to not screw it up. While redistribution might sound like a grand idea to you, the primary problem with its implementation is the loss effect. If I hand you a dollar…it’s a dollar. If the government takes a dollar from me, they hand you 70 cents and the other 30 gets lost in the overhead.”

      You talk as if the money is burnt by the government Dude, the government doesn’t “Lose” money. Every PENNY it collects, is either distributed, or PAID to someone, which goes into the economy as employment for government workers. Which means EVERY PENNY collected gets fully 100% redistributed. Nothing is loss.

      If the point of redistribution is to help the people, then giving 30% of the money to government workers is a form of welfare to the people, which means 100% of the redistribution is going to exactly what it was intended to do – support the people of the country.

      To suggest 30% is lost is the type of thinking a child would come up with.

      “4. The “rich” tend to be rich for a reason. 5. The poor tend to be poor for a reason”

      Yes, that’s true. It’s because the rich tend to be better at taking money from others, than the poor are. Just because some members of society are stronger than others, doesn’t give them the right to use their strength, to take resources away from the weak. I’m 6′ 230 lbs and I could take candy from a baby “for the reason” that I’m a big strong guy. Being a big strong guy dosen’t give me the right to steal candy from a baby, or to force a woman to have sex with me, or to take food from you.

      Being a better businessman likewise, is yet a different type of strength, some in society has. But again, just because they are strong, does not give them the right to take as much money, and power, form everyone else as they can “carry”.

      If you, and others like you, don’t wake up and understand that the rich are using their power to take control of the government away from the people, and using the government to further their ability to take even more money away from the people, which in the end, will lead to the very destruction of the democracy on which this country was founded.

      If you part of the rich, and use your power to steal more wealth from others, then you are the evil the people need to rise up stop. If you are not part of the rich, then you are an even worse evil – you are a tool of the rich allowing them to manipulate your small brain into helping them bring about your own destruction.

      “6. The only way to make everyone equal is to make everyone equally poor and miserable.”

      No one is talking about making everyone equal you FOOL. We are talking about reducing the massive amounts of INEQUALITY that exists back to _acceptable_ levels such as we had in the 60’s. Do you have any understanding of how bad inequality has gotten in the US. Google it, and find out.

      Technology drives inequality. It always has. It allows the strongest businessmen in society to leverage their strengths into every larger markets. It allows the strongest businessmen to take market share away from everyone else, which means more money ends up in their pockets, and not in the pockets of their competition. It’s technology that has allowed the 6 Walton’s to own more combined wealth, than the poorest 40% of the nation.

      It’s great for the economy that technology has allowed the creation of the giant chain store Walmart and the cheap products so many people find useful. But it’s UNACCEPTABLE that the wealth created by the technology has fallen so much, into the hands of only 6 people. That’s socially UNACCEPTABLE.

      This fact is true, not just becuase of how rich the Walton’s are, but becuase of how poor the bottom 40% of society is. The bottom 40% of society owns less than 2% of the wealth of the nation.

      This inequality exists today, when it didn’t exist 200 years ago in the US, because of technology. 200 years ago, wealth was created by hard labor. Lots of hard labor. And as long as people were willing to work from sunup to sundown in the fields, they were given a fair share of the wealth. Today, working from sunup to sundown no longer guarantees a fair share of the wealth, because wealth is no longer created by hard labor – it’s created mostly by technology in it’s many different forms. And only those are are best at mastering the technologies, get the lion’s share of the wealth.

      Working half as hard as the guy next to you in the field meant you got half his wealth. But today, working half as hard at say, being a CEO, means you get fired and replaced by the they guy working twice as hard, and you get nothing, and your replacement gets it all. Being half as good as a top pop star, means you don’t get any money as a musician, and you wait table for a living. Where the best of the best Pop stars, make millions, and the other musicians can’t make a living, even if they are 80% as good, as the top guy. Technology is turning wealth creation into a winner take all game where only the best of the best, get the money, and everyone else, gets to work at McDonalds.

      This trend can’t be “fixed” by education because it’s not a lack of education that is causing it. It’s the technology we have today, like the internet, that is causing the inequality. Technology is going to keep getting better, and inequality will keep growing larger, becuase of the technology. Free trade can’t fix the inequality because technology mixed with free trade, is what’s causing the inequality.

      The only long term fix, is direct wealth redistribution – socialism. I Know we have many “social-phobics” among us, but we must cure them of their phobia if we have any hope of saving this nation because it’s their phobia that is driving this nation into every higher levels of inequality, which is tearing down the very notion of equality of opportunity we built this nation on.

      “8. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor creates equally temporary changes. The “rich” will return to being rich, and the poor will return to being poor.”

      If you take it once, yes. If you set up taxes and take it every day, no. Which is exactly why this is not a one time need. We must implement a never end of flow of wealth, from the rich, to the poor, to reduce the high levels of inequality back to “fair” levels – back to levels that justify a person’s real contribution to society, not to what they can “game” from the system with their technology.

      People have never needed to be 1000 times richer than their neighbors to be motivated to be productive. Once our work covers are basic needs in life, the motivation becomes one of status, and not one of need. The rich compete not for the money they need to have a good life, but rather, for higher social standing, than their peers. When you take half the money away from all of them equally, they are still super rich, and still have the same relative social standing, and can continue to have their social competition for the place on the Forbes list. Taxing and redistributing doesn’t kill the drive to compete. It simply ends poverty and creates fair levels of inequality instead of massively unjust levels we are currently living with.

      MarvinM, the ideals you are supporting, will, without a doubt, DESTROY this country by allowing inequality to spiral out of control. The longer you fail to understand this, the quicker you bring the end to us all.

  • realistic4U

    I found it interesting that when Obama laid out a plan to combat global warming, the Republicans started talking jobs. Oh, now you care. How come you didn’t talk about jobs when Obama talked about building bridges. Perhaps, cause that would actually create jobs.

  • Max

    “It was concocted by those with money and power to manipulate a society into believing salvation lies by giving them more while everyone else gets their scraps.”

    Yes! I recently published a novel, “The Empathy Imperative,” by Max T. Furr, based partly on this very issue, which laid out their history, their methodology and where it will take us if the neoconservatives regain full power, and it isn’t pretty. Most, if not all of the party, have adopted the neoconservative world view.