Rich U.S. Entrepreneur: Tax the Rich to Reward True Job Creators

    Nick Hanauer is one of those entrepreneurs and venture capitalists who should not be taxed according to many because they create so many jobs. Hanauer was an early investor in Amazom and also founded a company that was eventually taken over by Microsoft for a cool 6.4 billion. However, Hanauer says that being rich he should be taxed and that it is not he who creates jobs.
   Entrepreneurs and venture capitalists can only be successful if they create products for which there is demand. The demand comes mostly from the middle class. Perhaps the Occupy groups would say the 99 per cent at least.
   While Hanauer admits that it is true that one needs creative entrepreneurs and investors to have a growing capitalist economy  he points out that without consumers there would be no entrepreneurs and investors. Those creative entrepreneurs need people to buy their products before they will get anywhere and before they will create jobs.
     Hanauer notes that since 1980 the top one tenth of one percent of Americans have seen their incomes rise by 400 per cent. The bottom 50 per cent have seen a decline of one third. Making the rich, richer will never produce a situation where there will be enough demand to power the U.S. economy and create more jobs.
    If the average U.S. family received now what they received in 1980 they would have 13,000 more to spend. This would mean more jobs as businesses geared up to make products to satisfy that demand.
But what is happening in the U.S. are policies that put less in the pockets of the average family as the rich are made richer meaning that there is also less demand. The slogan should not be: Don't tax the rich because they create jobs but Tax the rich and create jobs. For more see this article.

Afghanistan war: U.S. may stay in Afghanistan until 2024

  In the middle of November President Karzai held a four day loya jirga a meeting of over 2,000 tribal elders. His aim was to gain support for his plan to have U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan up to a full ten years after the present plans to hand over security to Afghans in 2014.
  Karzai and the U.S. had been planning an agreement back in August as this Telegraph article shows. Rather than presenting his plans directly to parliament President Karzai invited this large group of elders to the loya jirga and gain support first from them. It worked. He did get support but with several important provisos.
   The group suggested that Karzai talk to the Americans about an extension of  troop presence only if night raids were stopped. They also insisted that any detainees be handed over to Afghan custody. Finally they want the parliament to pass any agreement. The resolution from the group is non-binding so that one can expect Karzai will do his best to get around any provisions that he or the Americans find unacceptable.
   Meanwhile night raids continue to take their toll. Helicopters fired rockets in the Zairi district of Kandahar province that killed 3 Afghan women. The week before a NATO air strike killed nine civilians in the same area. As with  these news events, the news that the U.S. may be staying in Afghanistan until 2024 does not seem to be widely distributed. Are all those expert talking heads on major TV networks discussing this issue?  For more see here.