“I can create jobs” is a pet claim that has escaped its leash.
Now the mantra of every politician running for every elective office in America, nothing is further from the truth.
The only people who can claim they “create” jobs are those who sign the paychecks. When they say “You’re hired” they have accepted the risk that you will earn for the company at least as much as you will cost and that cash flow will include as much funds as necessary to pay you on a regular basis.
Keeping within these parameters may still leave the claim dubious. You obviously are not going to be well thought of in the United States if the job you created is in Southeast Asia, unless those who judge you are shareholders convinced this “job creation” will make for better profits.
There can be other concerns.
Perhaps the job created pays far less than another rendered obsolete. Again, only stockholders may applaud.
New jobs can be overrated in other ways. Take the thousands of jobs that presidential candidate Mitt Romney claims he helped create while Bain Capital – his company – was helping Staples get on its feet. Mr. Romney tactfully fails to mention that while Staples grew, the office supply and electronics selling business did not.
In 2008 Office Depot, a Staples competitor, announced it would close 112 stores and in 2009 did permanently furlough 2,200 people according to RetailIndustry.About.com, a research bible for commercial businesses. Then, of course, there are the 30,000 mostly geeks who lost their paychecks when Circuit City chain collapsed.
How many people do we really need to transport, stock and sell staples, paper clips, tablets, folders, (even) computers, printers, office furniture and the like? How many of these jobs pay family-sustaining wages? How many of these products are made in this country?
Bain Capital, under Mr. Romney’s leadership, may well have made a small contribution to the US economy in that Staples is able to sell these commodities cheaper due to more efficiencies and economies of scale, but at what cost? There are fewer family-owned office supply stores around and increased consolidated buying power has forced manufacturing overseas to meet the pricing “crunch downs.”
The “Stop Romney” movement centers on belittling his accomplishments to prevent his nomination. Obviously getting voters to not vote for him takes precedent over sticking with facts. Here’s another example of the anti-Romney people heading up the wrong trail.
His opponents are now attacking the obscenities of his huge investment income and are convinced some of it must be made from unsavory activities. Romney’s response is that his investments are in a “blind trust” and he makes no decisions regarding what is bought, sold or held.
If true and some Republicans believe our next President should be a successful business person, then they need to draft and nominate the manager of Romney’s blind trust.
Subscribe