All demand is consequence (and a trivial one) of production. iPads didn't exist and demand for them didn't exist until thousands of people were paid millions of dollars over a number of years (jobs) to create them.

Wrong, demand is a consequence of production. With barter a person works (a job) to feed himself only. Companies create huge amounts of products hoping it would sell. The jobs exist much before any sale whatsoever. If the company is wrong as to how much it can sell and it spends too much on production it will lose money, it may fire people and even shut down but the work was already done long before then, salaries were paid out, people hired and products created.

I run a company and some of what I do doesnt have any clients, I am hoping to create the market. Yet I have 6 people in 2 countries who I employ working on these projects. I created the jobs. My savings are used to pay the salaries. My resources are used to create the product that I invented. Tell me more about jobs and products and customers, I am listening here.

Strawman. Barter or not, the job is produced by the seller or manufacturer and not by consumer as you stated before. The difference between an individual barterer and a company is the size and scale but not the concept. An individual only creates a job for himself and produces only what he can by himself, so he satisfies very little demand. A company produces more than 1 person can. A company organizes scarce resources including labour, land and capital to produce much more efficiently than a single person can.
Jobs are created in this efficient allocation of resources.

Don't start with me on economics if all you have is political agenda.

An employee loses a job, finds another one. Sure, he may have some difficult time in between. However he can just walk away and there is nothing the employer can do about it. I want to be able to sue employees for just walking away as they do sometimes. If I lose money as a company I want the employee to share in the pain of the financial loss. If a client doesn't pay for the work I want not to pay the employee who I hired to do the work. I can be sued as a business, I want to split the damages so that the employees also bear some reponsibility.

Oh, I can't really do any of that. The fucked up society cares to protect the employees much more than employers. In fact laws, lawsuits, regulations take away my individual rights as an employer but employees still have those and they get entitlements to demand things from me that go beyond what I am willing to offer.

Employees do not have the headache of obligations imposed by the oppressive violent government structures that employers have.

I am firmly on the side of individual rights, and this means I am firmly on the side that if a person becomes an employer they must not lose those rights.

Why oh why does it happen so that a group representing the majority of people in a so called democracy get more rights than a minority, employers. Can it be that democracy is really a system of the mob ganging up against a minority? Hmmm.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha aha has ooooh, good one. A company creates jobs as a consequence of organizing scarce resources in such a way that somebody becomes a paying customer while before that organization the customer did not exist. A person that never saw a car in his life may be an obvious client for somebody offering him a stronger horse, but he is not a client to a car company. A car company has to invest, hire and produce first, before the first buyer buys anything at all, the company already spent money, hired people and built the product.

Why don't you add "you didn't build that", while you are at it?

Precisely, that is exactly what socialism is: legal codification and glorification of plunder of the minority of business owners and professionals by running the majority - the mob. They feel justified in it too, they legalized theft, codified destruction of the individual rights.

Oh, you wanted to conflate THAT with sound business practice of lowering input costs to make production more efficient by replacing more expensive work force with less expensive one? Why don't you also advocate for unions while at it? You think a job is owned by the employee as opposed to the employer? I take it you codified and glorified theft of private property in your mind just fine.

Corporations shouldn't exist because government shouldn't be regulating or taxing business in the first place. Government should be less than 1% of what it is today, maybe less than 0.001% of what it is. A business is a private matter, government mixing with business is the problem. Before 1970s most banks where private partnerships who were not 'too big to fail', they could fail and that was healthy for the economy and society to let failures fail (businesses or individuals, no difference).

Corporation is government protection against liability that shouldn't even exist, neither should any business regulations or income or wealth taxes. Only the best in the field businesses should survive on their own merits, not because of any law anywhere.

As far as I am concerned all transactions must absolutely voluntary, nobody should be coerced into anything. Let the chaotic movement become organized by purr market forces. This means no boundaries, no artificial locks or prices. Only real money, only real prices on everything. Society should not be based on violence as it is still today. USA was a good attempt at market based society, but not good enough. Apparently China is already doing better.

Supposedly capitalist USA gives bad name to capitalism and supposedly communist China gives good name to communism. In reality China is much more capitalist than the USA is today and the effects are obvious. USA is on a quick decline and China ison a very quick rise.

So you say.

I say that a society that destroys individual freedoms by using government violence l shouldn't exist. As to 'I am alright, fuck you', that is a nice narrative, applied to individual freedoms, but the reality is that it is much more appropriate tocyour socialist vision, where the majority oppresses a minority, minority being people building the economy, running businesses that produce thing everybody needs and wants. Businesses are the entities that create and give (and selling is giving in exchange, that is the only way to be sustainable). I say that companies give us everything and the mob wants to steal more than what is exchanged on the voluntary basis.

I say that the true humanitarians are businesses, without them the society is precisely what you described. I say that by running a business an individual must not lose his or her rights to the collective wishes of the mob. I say everybody must be free to do business as they wish, as long as they do not murder, rape or steal. I say mob and government are the primary causes of murder, rape and theft, not business.

I don't know about a smurfhammer but this topic reeks of being a trolldozer.

It is utterly sickening, because it means you are not actually the owner of the property that you are trying to operate. The government now polices over your business, which means over you and it means you now lost a whole bunch of rights that you have as a person. No government should be anywhere near the voluntary exchange that happens between any two non-government parties. There shouldn't be such a concept even as 'business regulations' any more than there should be 'person regulations' and that also shouldn't exist. As for any crime that could be committed, even that doesn't require any government intervention, people can have perfectly fine private systems to deal with criminals, with murder, theft, breaches of contract and any type of harm.

Yeah, obviously, truth hurts and I don't think you can take the amount of pain that you genuinely deserve on this entire subject without having your ass explode out of your mouth.

- first of all you are a moron. Money is only a measure of wealth, wealth is production and it is up to individuals to produce. Without production there is nothing at all, including nothing to measure, which means production comes first as a matter of savings and applying those savings to create something. Money comes second as a way to save, exchange and measure wealth. Money may be a concept that is created by society, but wealth is the actual stuff created by individuals, you thieving crackpot.

- being rich in your mind comes from theft, you piece of shit. How about actually working for leaving, you waste of degenerate skin?

- a well functioning society depends on individuals willing to produce. The only reason a piece of shit like you exists is because of individuals who allowed you to exist by producing enough that your degenerate ancestors were able to maintain your life by consuming the products created by the people a piece of intolerable shit like you have no business even looking at, never mind stealing from.

- ha ha ha, you stinky bastard. Once your society dies by eating itself while losing the capacity for producing enough, you will become what your real call in life is: a crackhore, giving out blowjobs for crumbs under some bridge.

Yeah, people should move away from the paradise that the diseased minds like yours have turned the USA into. You are the disease that people should move away from, of-course the hypocrisy of you, suggesting people run away from you is overwhelming, so is the stink that you raise every time you open your fucking mouth. USA used to be the place people ran away to from the disease like you, now people will have to run away from you somewhere else, your advice is sound, your proposal is hypocritical.

Ha ha ha, the troll comes out of the cave. 'Social hygiene is pathetic and diseased', says the troll, whose entire history of posting consists of destroying exactly that, destroy the social hygiene and honest, voluntary participation. I point out that the resulting destruction of the economy and the society of his ideology leads the troll to recommend leaving the society he embraces in order to search for better opportunities.

They hypocrisy is one aspect here, but the fucking stupidity is even deeper than that. The reason people came to the USA originally was exactly the same reason you are giving an advice on: lack of opportunity due to gigantic government state and absence of individual liberties and freedoms. The stink that reeks from your stupidity is overwhelming. You do not exist without context, the context matter and history of your context puts a wonderful perspective on all of your comments on this (and the other) forums.

The context being that you are the disease that causes you now to propose that people should move away to keep from the disease that you are. Well, maybe that is the actual correct advice, I am not going to argue on the merits of your advice in this case, I happen to agree with it as well. But that's like Ebola disease suggesting to people to run away from it.