> > I do not believe investment creates jobs, I believe increased consumption and protective economic policy create jobs. > You are entitled to your beliefs T

> > I do not believe investment creates jobs, I believe increased consumption and protective economic policy create jobs. > You are entitled to your beliefs Thank you :) > but factually you are completely wrong. Without investment, you have no goods to consume. I'm not saying investment in not needed at all. I'm saying that it does not create jobs. The demand for bicycles creates jobs. Not the investment in the production process. The investment follows the (predicted) consumption. > I suppose investment doesn’t create jobs if you have a society of pure slavery. Seriously? Slavery has often been "invested" in. They merrily went hand in hand. Societies that did not have a capital system (like native americans or aborigines) sure were not all slaves. Your statement make no sense. > Protective economic policy doesn’t create jobs — it stifles them. North Korea isn’t known for its booming economy (or full employment) because they don’t have much outside investment. I have no idea, nor interest in NK, in this matter. Look at Taiwan, Singapore and HongKong. They were protective and managed to race out of poverty. Now look at the countries that signed every trade agreement the IMF made them sign: all fucked. > Investment absolutely creates jobs because there is one human truth that can’t be escaped — people need to eat and thus they need to be paid. Getting by paid comes from capital and capital comes from investment. Dead wrong again. Am economically-rational business owner would rather not pay anyone. The only reason he does is because he needs the worker in order to supply the demand. THE DEMAND comes first, consumption comes first. Thus investment does not create jobs: increased consumption does. There's a chicken-egg problem there, a consumer needs money to consume, and that often comes from jobs. Investment can break that cycle, but it can just as easily fuck it up. And --as I mentioned-- investment follow (predicted) consumption. > I get it that’s many people seem to dream of a socialist utopia — however that is a fantasy. It doesn’t exist and it never has because people are fundamentally driven by their need to eat. If that need is frustrated, yes. But often we have enough food, and housing, and then it starts to get interesting. I'm not dreaming of a soc utopia, I'm being realistic in knowing that it is increased consumption and protective econ policy that creates jobs. Investment follows.