Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Your response is completely supply-side -- it just assumes demand is there. Which is kinda proving ironweed's point.

do you own an ipad? did you "demand" one before it was available?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

do you own an ipad? did you "demand" one before it was available?

Good example of a new product! Where are Apple's manufacturing facilities located, again?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Lowering tax rates = (a) more cash in the hands of consumers to buy stuff and (b) more cash available to invest in business.

People are saving (and paying off debts) right now, not spending, which means that lowering tax rates does not have the beneficial effects that it does in non-recessionary times. And no one is investing in business (in a relative) because business does not see demand, which is why interest rates are so incredibly low. Instead, people are worried about the economy and looking for safe places to park their money, which means that everyone wants to buy government bonds. But it turns out that EC government bonds aren't safe, and the US government stubbornly refuses to create the safe investments that the market is craving. All of which creates more concern about the future, and makes people want to save instead of spending.

Recession economics are different.

EVERYONE wants return and the money needs to go in some investment in order to get it.

No. Many people want safety, and they are willing to give up return to get it. But if everyone -- public and private -- all tries to save at the same time, then no one is borrowing money.

It probably doesn't in a vacuum, although I haven't really studied this. But cutting government theoretically should lead to requiring less taxes, which should lead to reducing rates, which should lead to more cash available for purchasing power and investment, which should lead to more jobs, etc.

In ordinary times, there is truth to this. But there are goods that only the government provides and that people want, and if you cut government in a way that prevents it from providing these goods, then the people who want these goods are worse off. And much of the conservative opposition to government is coming from the fact that the core of the conservative movement does not want these goods even though most of the country does.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Good example of a new product! Where are Apple's manufacturing facilities located, again?

when it was a start up? a Garage in cali.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Good example of a new product! Where are Apple's manufacturing facilities located, again?

Oh!!! I know this one!!

It doesn't have any.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

do you own an ipad? did you "demand" one before it was available?

Some parts of the economy, like Silicon Valley, are seeing growth and demand, but that doesn't mean that the economy is as a whole.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

Oh!!! I know this one!!

It doesn't have any.

10 points for Adder!

Next question: how many more people are projected to be employed in the US manufacturing computers over the next ten years? You know, from all those start-ups who will work in the US doing new stuff.

Let's do this one mulitiple choice style:

A. One million

B. 500,000

C. 0

D. -250,000

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

it would tend to be small and not have resources or the size to do so. also, from an econ standpoint, the cost difference between US manufacture and foreign is less of a problem for a novel product selling to it's features as opposed to a more established thing that is typically closer to a commodity.

Smallness & lack of resources would seem to be an argument for making it overseas where you might be able to have it made on a contract basis without building your own manufacturing plant.

But a novel product cuts the other way as there is significantly more chance of your intellectual property being stolen without much recourse when you are manufacturing in, say, China.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

10 points for Adder!

Next question: how many more people are projected to be employed manufacturing computers over the next ten years? You know, from all those start-ups who will work in the US doing new stuff.

go read Ty's flow chart.

One could argue (convincingly) that tax structure has little to do with people deciding to start a company and make stuff. The people who start up a product are following a dream. However, to the extent they are providing an improved product they can surely drive sales.

What did steve jobs say about the vlaue of Consumer research to an innovative company?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Smallness & lack of resources would seem to be an argument for making it overseas where you might be able to have it made on a contract basis without building your own manufacturing plant.

Again, you can "cut" whatever way you want. I am fairly sure I have held the hand of more start up that the others here (besides for GGG, whom I am sure works with hundreds of them in between working in politics and doing the other shit he claims to do). I guess I have known individuals that have taken a product to China to be made, but know far more that hired several workers here.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

10 points for Adder!

Next question: how many more people are projected to be employed in the US manufacturing computers over the next ten years? You know, from all those start-ups who will work in the US doing new stuff.

Let's do this one mulitiple choice style:

A. One million

B. 500,000

C. 0

D. -250,000

in your hypo does Obama get re-elected and do the Dems hold the senate?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Smallness & lack of resources would seem to be an argument for making it overseas where you might be able to have it made on a contract basis without building your own manufacturing plant.

You mean like Foxconn?

But a novel product cuts the other way as there is significantly more chance of your intellectual property being stolen without much recourse when you are manufacturing in, say, China.

You would think that, and yet there are a lot of tech products made there.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

go read Ty's flow chart.

One could argue (convincingly) that tax structure has little to do with people deciding to start a company and make stuff. The people who start up a product are following a dream. However, to the extent they are providing an improved product they can surely drive sales.

What did steve jobs say about the vlaue of Consumer research to an innovative company?

Yes, I'm looking for evidence - real evidence - that startups will manufacture here instead of elsewhere. A start up that is going to manufacture needs enough money to build a plant; it can't be wholly unfunded. So I don't buy the idea that lack of funds drive one to the US rather than China or Mexico. Fugee's point, that IP protection might, is a better one, but I don't think that drives that many manufacturing decisions. How would we figure that out? What kind of evidence might be useful? And what does that say about the motivational impact of tax cuts?

By the way, I think any focus on manufacturing jobs is a bit counterintuitive. If we're going to create jobs in the US, it won't be in manufacturing. but it's your point, I'll stick to it.

[LessinSF]

Picked up my new Reisepass the other day.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Yes, I'm looking for evidence - real evidence - that startups will manufacture here instead of elsewhere.

In some industries, they certainly will. But maybe at a small scale.

A start up that is going to manufacture needs enough money to build a plant

A plant might just be a workbench in a lab though.