"Corporations and business do not create jobs"

Economics is defined as the allocation of scarce resources; therefore, I could take Madame Clinton's comments to mean she believes Government will create jobs by allocating scarce resources. If that is in fact what is meant by the former SECSTATE, I would say she is wildly ignorant on the topic of Economics. All of the countries throughout the world that have Gov't leading their economies are on the precipice of civil unrest, a low standard of living and an uncertain future. Case in point: Saudi Arabia. The House of Saud allocates scarce resources ($ from Oil) so they can stay in power; however, when was the last time you heard of innovation or new products coming from Saudi Arabia? I know people there probably want to have smartphones, new luxury cars, etc - however, a place like Saudi will never be able to develop these things. The same goes for Russia. Africa is a whole continent of Gov't/UN Economic control and it is in dire straits. France comes to mind as well (GE recently had to purchase their failing Gov't sponsored Power Business - as it was losing money hand over fist). China? Not quite - as they are practicing more of a new age mercantilism. The list goes on...Gov't can set up a nice, safe zone where the rule of law is respected. But Gov't is horrible at allocating resources.

MSgt (Join to see), I think some would say that the government creates jobs. Not me! But some would.

Corporations don't create jobs. Consumer demand for their products creates jobs. Remove people buying what they're selling, and all the tax breaks on earth aren't going to keep that company in business and they won't be hiring additional people. Also, look at the effects of tax cuts vs stimulus spending during the bail out. The government received roughly $1 for every $1 spent on tax cuts, while receiving around $1.5 for every $1 spent on stimulus spending. The nations that did the largest stimulus spending (like the US) are doing much better now than the countries in Europe who opted for austerity.

HMMM!! I really am not knowlegdable in this matter but, I have been watching this reality show on TV called "Profit" and I will have to disagree with Sister Hillary on this matter!

It is obvious by her talking about trickle down economics that she was speaking of tax cuts to businesses not creating jobs. She has since come back and clarified that exact point.

The current situation in Kansas explains what she was trying to say. Gov. Sam Brownback implemented massive tax cuts in order to supposedly create jobs and help the economy. His plan failed miserably, and job growth in Kansas is at 1.9% compared to the 3.1% national average. Kansas also ended up with $338 million less in revenue than they predicted and $700 million less than what was collected in FY 13. Not to mention this entire tax cut was funded by the largest cut to public education in Kansas history.

As it seems with everything, the truth seems to lie somewhere in between. The government relies on taxes collected from private citizens and corporations to staff itself and fund things like transportation infrastructure projects and defense that then facilitate growth in the private sector. That growth then fuels more production and jobs and requires more infrastructure. If you took away all of the regulation on these corporations it would look like the robber baron years all over, but without them there would be no government or infrastructure to speak of.